FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2056587524> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2056587524 endingPage "59" @default.
• W2056587524 startingPage "51" @default.
• W2056587524 abstract "PURPOSE: To compare gentleness of a silicone tape to a paper tape and to an untreated control. DESIGN: Controlled, randomized, grader-blinded cohort trial. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample group comprised 28 healthy volunteers aged 55 years and older (median age = 63 years) with a Fitzpatrick Skin Type of I, II, or III. All volunteers were recruited from the greater Philadelphia area and the study was conducted at a dermatological research facility specializing in noninvasive instrumental measurements. METHODS: Tapes were applied and removed daily (excluding weekends) to 2 of 3 sites on the left and right volar forearms over an 11-day period. The center site on each forearm was left untreated and tapes were randomized to the proximal and distal sites. The primary assessment was transepidermal water loss (TEWL); secondary assessments included erythema/edema, denudation/skin-stripping, and subject self-evaluations. Study personnel conducting the primary and secondary assessments were not involved with treatments to maintain the blinded nature of the study. The identity of the 2 tapes was not revealed to the subjects until after conclusion of the study. RESULTS: On day 11 the mean TEWL value for the paper tape was significantly higher than that for both the untreated control and silicone tape (P < .001). End-of-study mean TEWL values were 2.65 ± 0.68 g/m2h for the silicone tape, 6.85 ± 4.97 g/m2h for the paper tape, and 3.73 ± 1.19 g/m2h for the untreated control. At all assessments, the silicone tape exhibited net changes from baseline that were significantly less than the paper tape (P < .05 day 1, P < .001 days 4, 7, and 11) and similar for the untreated control. Only at days 4 (P < .01) and 11 (P < .001) was the paper tape significantly higher than that for the untreated control. Throughout the study, both tapes exhibited mean TEWL values within the range of normal intact forearm skin, indicating that both tapes were gentle. No differences in erythema/edema scores occurred but the silicone tape resulted in lower denudation/skin-stripping scores than the paper tape at days 4 to 11 (P < .0001). Self-assessment of pain at removal was low for both tapes but significantly lower for the silicone tape (days 1–7, P = .02; day 11, P = .009). Forty-four percent of participants expressed a preference for the silicone tape as compared to the paper tape (19%), with 37% stating no preference. CONCLUSIONS: Based on TEWL assessment of disruption of the stratum corneum water barrier, the silicone tape proved gentler to the skin than the paper tape. After 9 applications and removals over 11 days of study, the silicone tape was similar to the untreated control, whereas the paper tape exhibited significantly higher mean TEWL values than both the untreated control and the silicone tape. Expert grader assessments corroborate these findings. These data indicate that the silicone tape may provide additional gentleness when it is clinically needed." @default.
• W2056587524 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2056587524 creator A5014979985 @default.
• W2056587524 creator A5054717304 @default.
• W2056587524 creator A5086060501 @default.
• W2056587524 creator A5088442211 @default.
• W2056587524 creator A5089592450 @default.
• W2056587524 date "2013-01-01" @default.
• W2056587524 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2056587524 title "A Randomized and Controlled Comparison of Gentleness of 2 Medical Adhesive Tapes in Healthy Human Subjects" @default.
• W2056587524 cites W1595973067 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W1963741667 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W1967520809 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W1971353467 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W1976797235 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W1983079125 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2002256596 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2016769792 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2049741710 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2053158774 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2055349824 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2074343451 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2077939920 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2080379699 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2088798928 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2092738470 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2099343263 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2101522104 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2101543762 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2107896365 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W2139017363 @default.
• W2056587524 cites W4250928742 @default.
• W2056587524 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/won.0b013e318276f2a4" @default.
• W2056587524 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23202590" @default.
• W2056587524 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2056587524 type Work @default.
• W2056587524 sameAs 2056587524 @default.
• W2056587524 citedByCount "24" @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242013 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242014 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242015 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242016 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242017 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242018 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242019 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242020 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242021 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242022 @default.
• W2056587524 countsByYear W20565875242023 @default.
• W2056587524 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2056587524 hasAuthorship W2056587524A5014979985 @default.
• W2056587524 hasAuthorship W2056587524A5054717304 @default.
• W2056587524 hasAuthorship W2056587524A5086060501 @default.
• W2056587524 hasAuthorship W2056587524A5088442211 @default.
• W2056587524 hasAuthorship W2056587524A5089592450 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C178790620 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C2778370115 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C2779121184 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C2779769944 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConcept C95150158 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C141071460 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C142724271 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C168563851 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C178790620 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C185592680 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C2778370115 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C2779121184 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C2779769944 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C71924100 @default.
• W2056587524 hasConceptScore W2056587524C95150158 @default.
• W2056587524 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2056587524 hasLocation W20565875241 @default.
• W2056587524 hasLocation W20565875242 @default.
• W2056587524 hasOpenAccess W2056587524 @default.
• W2056587524 hasPrimaryLocation W20565875241 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W1971351537 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W1998047353 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W2009055273 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W2050378803 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W2054756536 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W2059243923 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W2160328407 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W2397793164 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W2889169472 @default.
• W2056587524 hasRelatedWork W3196782822 @default.
• W2056587524 hasVolume "40" @default.
• W2056587524 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2056587524 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2056587524 magId "2056587524" @default.
• W2056587524 workType "article" @default.