Improving newborn skin health: Effects of diaper care regimens on skin pH and erythema.
diaper dermatitis
diaper skin
erythema
neonatal skin
skin pH
Journal
Pediatric dermatology
ISSN: 1525-1470
Titre abrégé: Pediatr Dermatol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8406799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Jul 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
2
6
2021
medline:
1
9
2021
entrez:
1
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Newborn infant skin is functional but immature, and diapering products can play a significant role in infant diapered skin health. Previous work demonstrated a regimen consisting of a diaper with an emollient and apertures on the inner liner (topsheet) with an acidic, pH-buffered wipe (Regimen A) lowered newborn skin pH and reduced the enzymatic activity on skin post-stool cleaning versus a regimen without these features (Regimen B). This study extends these findings to determine the impact of Regimen A on diaper area erythema severity over a 2-week use period. This IRB-approved, blinded, randomized, crossover study enrolled newborn infants >7 days and ≤8 weeks. Participants exclusively used two unique diaper and wipe combinations, Regimen A and Regimen B (non-emollient, non-aperture containing topsheet and wipe with limited buffering capacity), each for 14 days and preceded by a 3-day washout regimen. Diapered skin pH was reduced during Regimen A use to values similar to that of a non-diapered control site (chest), while use of Regimen B was associated with a more alkaline skin pH. Regimen A resulted in significantly fewer severe erythema episodes. At the site of highest erythema, the perianal space, the average erythema score was significantly lower and more newborns were free of erythema while using Regimen A vs. Regimen B (P < .05). These findings demonstrate that diapering products can have a significant impact on newborn skin. They reinforce the need to support the physiological normalization of skin pH and protection from skin irritation and damage.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
Newborn infant skin is functional but immature, and diapering products can play a significant role in infant diapered skin health. Previous work demonstrated a regimen consisting of a diaper with an emollient and apertures on the inner liner (topsheet) with an acidic, pH-buffered wipe (Regimen A) lowered newborn skin pH and reduced the enzymatic activity on skin post-stool cleaning versus a regimen without these features (Regimen B). This study extends these findings to determine the impact of Regimen A on diaper area erythema severity over a 2-week use period.
METHODS
METHODS
This IRB-approved, blinded, randomized, crossover study enrolled newborn infants >7 days and ≤8 weeks. Participants exclusively used two unique diaper and wipe combinations, Regimen A and Regimen B (non-emollient, non-aperture containing topsheet and wipe with limited buffering capacity), each for 14 days and preceded by a 3-day washout regimen.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Diapered skin pH was reduced during Regimen A use to values similar to that of a non-diapered control site (chest), while use of Regimen B was associated with a more alkaline skin pH. Regimen A resulted in significantly fewer severe erythema episodes. At the site of highest erythema, the perianal space, the average erythema score was significantly lower and more newborns were free of erythema while using Regimen A vs. Regimen B (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
These findings demonstrate that diapering products can have a significant impact on newborn skin. They reinforce the need to support the physiological normalization of skin pH and protection from skin irritation and damage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34060142
doi: 10.1111/pde.14602
pmc: PMC8453578
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
768-774Subventions
Organisme : Procter and Gamble
Informations de copyright
© 2021 Procter & Gamble. Pediatric Dermatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Pediatr Dermatol. 2020 Jan;37(1):130-136
pubmed: 31793090
Pediatr Dermatol. 1994 Mar;11(1):18-20
pubmed: 8170842
Adv Dermatol. 1988;3:75-98
pubmed: 3152829
Arch Dermatol Res. 1998 Apr;290(4):215-22
pubmed: 9617442
Skin Pharmacol Physiol. 2011;24(6):322-9
pubmed: 21822033
Pediatr Dermatol. 2021 Jul;38(4):768-774
pubmed: 34060142
Pediatr Dermatol. 2014 Nov;31 Suppl 1:9-14
pubmed: 25403933
Lancet. 2017 Oct 14;390(10104):1770-1780
pubmed: 28434651
Pediatr Dermatol. 2000 Jan-Feb;17(1):52-7
pubmed: 10720989
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 25;10(9):e0138117
pubmed: 26407180
Pediatr Dermatol. 2000 Jan-Feb;17(1):45-51
pubmed: 10720988
Pediatr Dermatol. 2020 Jul;37(4):626-631
pubmed: 32314466
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2000 Sep;154(9):943-6
pubmed: 10980800
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2012 Jan-Feb;37(1):10-6
pubmed: 22072018
Pediatr Dermatol. 2009 Sep-Oct;26(5):506-13
pubmed: 19840302
Dermatology. 2000;200(3):238-43
pubmed: 10828633
Pediatr Dermatol. 2016 May;33(3):311-21
pubmed: 26919683
Am J Perinatol. 2018 Apr;35(5):486-493
pubmed: 29166675
Pediatr Dermatol. 2018 Nov;35(6):792-795
pubmed: 30168199
Neonatology. 2009;96(4):226-34
pubmed: 19407468