No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Practical advice for baby skin care
Abstract
There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support best practice for infant skin cleansing, says Sandra Lawton
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Loss-of-function mutations in the skin barrier protein filaggrin (FLG) are a major risk for atopic dermatitis (AD). The pathogenic sequence of disturbances in skin barrier function before or during the early development of AD is not fully understood. A more detailed understanding of these events is needed to develop a clearer picture of disease pathogenesis. A robust, noninvasive test to identify babies at high risk of AD would be important in planning early intervention and/or prevention studies.
To ascertain whether a noninvasive measurement of skin barrier function at day 2 after birth and at 2 months predicts the development of AD at 1 year. Furthermore, to determine whether increases in transepidermal water loss (TEWL) predate the development of clinical AD.
A total of 1903 infants were enrolled in the Cork Babies After Scope: Evaluating the Longitudinal Impact Using Neurological and Nutritional Endpoints Birth Cohort study from July 2009 to October 2011. Measurements of TEWL were made at birth (day 2) and at 2 and 6 months. The presence of AD was ascertained at 6 and 12 months, and disease severity was assessed by using the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis clinical tool at 6 months and by using both the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis clinical tool and Nottingham Severity Score at 12 months. A total of 1300 infants were genotyped for FLG mutations.
At 6 months, 18.7% of the children had AD, and at 12 months, 15.53%. In a logistic regression model, day 2 upper quartile TEWL measurement was significantly predictive of AD at 12 months (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.81; P < .05). Lowest quartile day 2 TEWL was protective against AD at 12 months. An upper quartile 2 month TEWL was also strongly predictive of AD at 12 months (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.84; P < .05). At both ages, this effect was independent of parental atopy, FLG status, or report of an itchy flexural rash at 2 months. Associations were increased when parental atopy status or child FLG mutation status was added into the linear regression model.
Impairment of skin barrier function at birth and at 2 months precedes clinical AD. In addition to providing important mechanistic insights into disease pathogenesis, these findings have implications for the optimal timing of interventions for the prevention of AD.
Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
There has been a steep rise in the burden of atopic dermatitis (AD), and up to 20% of children in developed countries now suffer of the disease. At present, treatment at best achieves symptom control rather than cure, and there is a strong need to identify new methods of disease prevention. While earlier approaches focused on allergen avoidance strategies, there has been a clear shift towards attempts to induce tolerance and enhancement of skin barrier function, as skin barrier breakdown plays an important role in AD development. This article reviews the latest developments in the prevention of AD.
Atopic dermatitis now affects one in five children, and may progress to asthma and hay fever. In the absence of effective treatments that influence disease progression, prevention is a highly desirable goal. The evidence for most existing disease prevention strategies, such as avoidance of allergens and dietary interventions, has been unconvincing and inconsistent. Fresh approaches to prevention include trying to induce tolerance to allergens in early life, and enhancing the defective skin barrier to reduce skin inflammation, sensitisation and subsequent allergic disease. Early and aggressive treatment of atopic dermatitis represents another possible secondary prevention strategy that could interrupt the development of autoimmunity, which may account for atopic dermatitis persistence. Large scale and long term randomized controlled trials are needed to demonstrate that these ideas result in clinical benefit.
Some national guidelines recommend the use of water alone for napkin cleansing. Yet, there is a readiness, amongst many parents, to use baby wipes. Evidence from randomised controlled trials, of the effect of baby wipes on newborn skin integrity is lacking. We conducted a study to examine the hypothesis that the use of a specifically formulated cleansing wipe on the napkin area of newborn infants (<1 month) has an equivalent effect on skin hydration when compared with using cotton wool and water (usual care).
A prospective, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled equivalence trial was conducted during 2010. Healthy, term babies (n=280), recruited within 48 hours of birth, were randomly assigned to have their napkin area cleansed with an alcohol-free baby wipe (140 babies) or cotton wool and water (140 babies). Primary outcome was change in hydration from within 48 hours of birth to 4 weeks post-birth. Secondary outcomes comprised changes in trans-epidermal water loss, skin surface pH and erythema, presence of microbial skin contaminants/irritants at 4 weeks and napkin dermatitis reported by midwife at 4 weeks and mother during the 4 weeks.
Complete hydration data were obtained for 254 (90.7 %) babies. Wipes were shown to be equivalent to water and cotton wool in terms of skin hydration (intention-to-treat analysis: wipes 65.4 (SD 12.4) vs. water 63.5 (14.2), p=0.47, 95% CI -2.5 to 4.2; per protocol analysis: wipes 64.6 (12.4) vs. water 63.6 (14.3), p=0.53, 95% CI -2.4 to 4.2). No significant differences were found in the secondary outcomes, except for maternal-reported napkin dermatitis, which was higher in the water group (p=0.025 for complete responses).
Baby wipes had an equivalent effect on skin hydration when compared with cotton wool and water. We found no evidence of any adverse effects of using these wipes. These findings offer reassurance to parents who choose to use baby wipes and to health professionals who support their use.
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN86207019.
Background:
The vulnerability of newborn babies' skin creates the potential for a number of skin problems. Despite this, there remains a dearth of good quality evidence to inform practice. Published studies comparing water with a skin-cleansing product have not provided adequate data to inform an adequately powered trial. Nor have they distinguished between babies with and without a predisposition to atopic eczema. We conducted a pilot study as a prequel to designing an optimum trial to investigate whether bathing with a specific cleansing product is superior to bathing with water alone. The aims were to produce baseline data which would inform decisions for the main trial design (i.e. population, primary outcome, sample size calculation) and to optimize the robustness of trial processes within the study setting.
Methods:
100 healthy, full term neonates aged <24 hours were randomly assigned to bathing with water and cotton wool (W) or with a cleaning product (CP). A minimum of bathing 3 times per week was advocated. Groups were stratified according to family history of atopic eczema. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL), stratum corneum hydration and skin surface pH were measured within 24 hours of birth and at 4 and 8 weeks post birth. Measurements were taken on the thigh, forearm and abdomen. Women also completed questionnaires and diaries to record bathing practices and medical treatments.
Results:
Forty nine babies were randomized to cleansing product, 51 to water. The 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the average TEWL measurement at each time point were: whole sample at baseline: 10.8 g/m(2)/h to 11.7 g/m(2)/h; CP group 4 weeks: 10.9 g/m(2)/h to 13.3 g/m(2)/h; 8 weeks: 11.4 g/m(2)/h to 12.9 g/m(2)/h; W group 4 weeks:10.9 g/m(2)/h to 12.2 g/m(2)/h; 8 weeks: 11.4 g/m(2)/h to 12.9 g/m(2)/h.
Conclusion:
This pilot study provided valuable baseline data and important information on trial processes. The decision to proceed with a superiority trial, for example, was inconsistent with our data; therefore a non-inferiority trial is recommended.
Although the U.S. pediatric skin care market is a $1.7 billion industry, little is known regarding the usage pattern of skin care products in very young children. We have begun to recognize that common over-the-counter skin care products may have positive or negative effects on skin barrier function. Thus, knowing what and how skin care products are used early in life is important. The goal of the current study was to better understand skin care product use in the United States using market research data. We found that the prevalence of use was greater than 50% for all skin care product categories and age groups. Premoistened cleansing wipes and cloths were the most frequently used product, followed by baby oil and lotion and body and baby powder. Baby bath and shampoo products were used at least five times per week per household, and caregivers generally preferred products that were fragrance-free and made for sensitive skin. Lower-income households reported a higher frequency of product use and were less likely to purchase fragrance-free products or ones that were made for sensitive skin. Our findings suggest that the prevalence of pediatric skin care product use is high and conflicts with current recommended skin care guidelines. Product use and preferences may also vary according to race and ethnicity and household income level.
Methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI) and methylisothiazolinone (MI), also known as Kathon CG (MCI/MI) collectively, are preservatives. MI has been used in a 1:3 combination with MCI in wash off and leave on cosmetic products since the early 1980s (1) . Found in industrial products since the early 2000s, in 2005(2) MI alone was permitted as a preservative in leave on and wash off cosmetic products at a maximum concentration of 100 ppm(3) . This has led to fears over significant increases in contact sensitisation to MI and in 2013 MI was named contact allergen of the year. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Skin care practices involving the application of products to the skin are common. This article focuses on these aspects of infant skin care, the importance of skin barrier function and how the use of products and therapies applied to the skin can affect skin‑barrier function. It also challenges current practice and tradition, and highlights the evolving body of research into practice and tradition.
Natural oils are advocated and used throughout the world as part of neonatal skin care, but there is an absence of evidence to support this practice. The goal of the current study was to ascertain the effect of olive oil and sunflower seed oil on the biophysical properties of the skin. Nineteen adult volunteers with and without a history of atopic dermatitis were recruited into two randomized forearm-controlled mechanistic studies. The first cohort applied six drops of olive oil to one forearm twice daily for 5 weeks. The second cohort applied six drops of olive oil to one forearm and six drops of sunflower seed oil to the other twice daily for 4 weeks. The effect of the treatments was evaluated by determining stratum corneum integrity and cohesion, intercorneocyte cohesion, moisturization, skin-surface pH, and erythema. Topical application of olive oil for 4 weeks caused a significant reduction in stratum corneum integrity and induced mild erythema in volunteers with and without a history of atopic dermatitis. Sunflower seed oil preserved stratum corneum integrity, did not cause erythema, and improved hydration in the same volunteers. In contrast to sunflower seed oil, topical treatment with olive oil significantly damages the skin barrier, and therefore has the potential to promote the development of, and exacerbate existing, atopic dermatitis. The use of olive oil for the treatment of dry skin and infant massage should therefore be discouraged. These findings challenge the unfounded belief that all natural oils are beneficial for the skin and highlight the need for further research.
In recent years, there have been continuing efforts to understand the effects of baby skin care routines and products on the healthy development of baby skin. Such efforts aim ultimately to determine the best infant skin care practices. The pediatric and dermatologic communities have not reached consensus on what constitutes an appropriate cleansing practice. In the United States, guidelines for neonatal skin care have been developed, propagated, and implemented. The accumulated knowledge has promoted evidence-based clinical practices and, therefore, may help to improve clinical outcomes, although these guidelines primarily cover the care of preterm newborns and the treatment of those with other health problems. High-level, long-term clinical evidence of the effective and safe cleansing of healthy, full-term newborns and infants is scarce. This review presents a comprehensive analysis of the scientific literature on baby skin development, cleansing practices, and related products (for healthy newborns and babies) since 1970. The evidence drawn from the reviewed literature can be summarized as follows: Bathing immersed in water seems generally superior to washing alone. Bathing or washing with synthetic detergents (syndets) or mild liquid baby cleansers seems comparable with or even superior to water alone. Nevertheless, larger randomized clinical trials with age-defined cohorts of babies as well as more-defined parameters are required to identify optimal practices and products for skin cleansing of healthy infants. These parameters may include standardized skin function parameters such as transepidermal water loss, stratum corneum hydration, skin surface pH, and sebum production. Clinical skin scores such as the Neonatal Skin Condition Score may be employed as outcome measures.
Development of the skin barrier continues up to 12 months after birth; therefore, care must be taken when cleansing and bathing infants' skin. Available guidelines for skin care in newborns are, however, limited. In 2007, the 1st European Round Table meeting on 'Best Practice for Infant Cleansing' was held, at which a panel of expert dermatologists and paediatricians from across Europe aimed to provide a consensus on infant bathing and cleansing.
Based on discussions at the meeting and a comprehensive literature review, the panel developed a series of recommendations relating to several aspects of infant skin care, including initial and routine bathing, safety while bathing, and post-bathing procedures. The panel also focused on the use of liquid cleansers in bathing, particularly relating to the benefits of liquid cleansers over water alone, and the criteria that should be used when choosing an appropriate liquid cleanser for infants. Alkaline soaps have numerous disadvantages compared with liquid cleansers, with effects on skin pH and lipid content, as well as causing skin drying and irritation. Liquid cleansers used in newborns should have documented evidence of their mildness on skin and eyes, and those containing an emollient may have further benefits. Finally, the panel discussed seasonal differences in skin care, and issues relating to infants at high risk of atopic dermatitis. The panel further discussed the need of clinical studies to investigate the impact of liquid cleansers on skin physiology parameters on newborns' and infants' skin.
Bathing is generally superior to washing, provided basic safety procedures are followed, and has psychological benefits for the infant and parents. When bathing infants with a liquid cleanser, a mild one not altering the normal pH of the skin surface or causing irritation to skin or eyes should be chosen.
Breakdown of the skin barrier is the first event in the development of atopic eczema (atopic dermatitis). Research over the past five years has indicated that this arises as a result of the interaction of environmental agents such as soap and other detergents with the products of changes in several genes. These genetic changes predispose to the breakdown of the skin barrier, which allows the penetration of allergens, triggering a flare of atopic eczema. This new understanding of how breakdown of the skin barrier is the first event in the development of atopic eczema provides a rationale for a renaissance in the use of a complete emollient therapy regimen in atopic eczema and related skin barrier breakdown diseases, such as asteatotic eczema and irritant contact dermatitis.
Paraneoplastic pemphigus (PNP) has been described as an antibody-mediated mucocutaneous disease occurring almost exclusively in patients with lymphocytic neoplasms. We describe 4 patients with the clinical features of the lichenoid variant of PNP in the absence of detectable autoantibodies. On the basis of these findings, we conclude that the spectrum of PNP likely includes patients with disease predominantly or exclusively mediated by cytotoxic T cells rather than autoantibodies. The pathophysiology and range of PNP disease are likely more complex than was initially believed.