A Comparison of Two Antecubital Fossa Tests with Personal Care Products

References

• Branna T. Surfactants '95. Household Personal Prod. Ind 1995; 32(6)91
   Google Scholar
• Frosch P. J., Kligman A. M. The soap chamber test. A new method for assessing the irritancy of soaps. J Am. Acad. Dermatol. 1979; 1(1)35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frosch P. J. Irritancy of soaps and detergent bars. Principles of Cosmetics for the Dermatologist, P. Frost, S. N. Horwitz. C.V. Mosby Company, St Louis, MO 1982
   Google Scholar
• Wolf R. Has mildness replaced cleanliness next to godliness?. Dermatology 1994; 189: 217
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Valk P. G. M., Crijns M. C., Nater J. P., Bleumink E. Skin irritancy of commercially available soap and detergent bars as measured by water vapour loss. Dermatosen 1984; 32(3)87
   Google Scholar
• Rieger M. Surfactant interactions with skin. Cosmet. Toilet. 1995; 110: 31
   Google Scholar
• Kligman A. M. Assessment of mild irritants. Principles of Cosmetics for the Dermatologist, P. Frost, S. N. Horwitz. C.V. Mosby, St Louis, MO 1982
   Google Scholar
• Agner T., Serup J. Seasonal variation of skin resistance to irritants. Br. J. Dermatol. 1989; 121: 323
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson E. M. Irritation and sensitization. Clinical Safety and Efficacy Testing of Cosmetics, W. C. Waggoner. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY 1990
   Google Scholar
• Lukakovic M. F., Dunlap F. E., Michaels S. E., Visscher M. O., Watson D. D. Forearm wash test to evaluate the clinical mildness of cleansing products. J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem. 1988; 39: 355
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee C. H., Maibach H. I. Study of cumulative irritant contact dermatitis in man utilizing open application on subclinically irritated skin. Contact Derm. 1994; 30: 271
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frosch P. J., Kligman A. M. The chamber‐scarification test for irritancy. Contact Derm. 1976; 2: 314
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettley F. R., Donoghue E. The irritant effect of soap upon the normal skin. Br. J. Dermatol. 1960; 72: 67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malten K. E. Thoughts on irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Derm. 1981; 7: 238
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simion F. A., Rhein L. D., Grove G. L., Wojtkowski J. M., Cagan R. H., Scala D. D. Sequential order of skin responses to surfactants during a soap chamber test. Contact Derm. 1991; 25: 242
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoudemayer T., Zheng P., Kligman A. M. Hydration dermatitis. Occlusion alone rapidly injures human skin. Dermal Clinical Evaluation Society Scientific Poster Session, Montclair, NJ June 8, 1993
   Google Scholar
• Agner T., Serup J. Time course of occlusive effects on skin evaluated by measurement of transepidermal water loss (TEWL). Contact Derm. 1993; 28: 6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strube D. D., Koontz S. W., Murahata R. I., Theiler R. F. The flex wash test: A method for evaluating the mildness of personal washing products. J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem. 1989; 40: 297
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wortzman M. S. Evaluation of mild skin cleansers. Dermatol. Clin. 1991; 9(1)35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharko P. T., Murahata R. I., Leyden J. J., Grove G. L. Arm wash with instrumental evaluation—a sensitive technique for differentiating the irritation potential of personal washing products. J. Derm. Clin. Eval. Soc. 1991; 2: 19
   Google Scholar
• Swanson F. Clinical evaluation of a new neutral detergent bar. JAMA 1956; 162(5)459
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryant P. B., Ertel K. D., Keswick B. H., Reed B. R. Mild, synthetic personal cleansing bar well‐tolerated by atopic dermatitis subjects. 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology, New Orleans, LA, February, 4–91995
   Google Scholar
• Nicoll G. A., Barrows J., Murahata R. I., Greene A., Leyden J. J., Grove G. L. Clinical implications of mild cleansing products for individuals undergoing acne therapy with Retin‐A. 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology, New Orleans, LA, February, 4–91995
   Google Scholar
• Kligman A. M. Regression method for assessing the efficacy of moisturizers. Cosmet. Toilet. 1978; 93: 27
   Google Scholar
• Halkier‐Sorensen L., Thestrup‐Pedersen K. The efficacy of a moisturizer (Locobase) among cleaners and kitchen assistants during everyday exposure to water and detergents. Contact Derm. 1993; 29: 266
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appa Y., Hemingway L., Orth D. S., Laser W., Lockhart L. Healing of dry skin with high glycerin therapeutic moisturizers. 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology, New Orleans, LA, February, 4–91995
   Google Scholar
• Lodén M. Biophysical properties of dry atopic and normal skin with special reference to effects of skin care products. Acta Derm. Venereol. (Stockh.) 1995, Suppl. 192: 1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lane A. T., Drost S. S. Effects of repeated application of emollient cream to premature neonates' skin. Pediatrics 1993; 92: 415
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celleno L., Mastroianni A., Vasselli A., Tolaini M. V., Macchia R. Dermatological evaluation of cosmetic products for skin detergency. J. Appl. Cosmetol. 1993; 11: 1
   Google Scholar
• Pinnagoda J., Tupker R. A., Agner T., Serup J. Guidelines for transepidermal water loss (TEWL) measurement. Contact Derm. 1990; 22: 164
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bircher A. J. Laser Doppler measurement of skin blood flux: variation and validation. Handbook of Non‐Invasive Methods and the Skin, J. Serup, G. B. E. Jemec. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL 1995
   Google Scholar
• Finkey M. B., Crowe D. M. The use of evaporimetry to evaluate soap induced irritation on the face. Bioeng. Skin. 1988; 4: 311
   Google Scholar
• Keswick B. H., Ertel K. D., Visscher M. O. Comparison of exaggerated and normal use techniques for assessing the mildness of personal cleansers. J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem. 1992; 43: 187
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Boer E. M., Scholten R. J. P. M., van Ketel W. G., Bruynzeel D. P. Quantitation of mild irritant reactions to repeated patch application of liquid cleansers. A laser Doppler flowmetry study. Int. J. Cosmet. Sci. 1990; 12: 43
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Neste D., de Brouwer B. Monitoring of skin response to sodium lauryl sulfate: clinical scores versus bioengineering methods. Contact Derm. 1992; 27: 151
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman S., Maibach H. I. Study of irritant contact dermatitis produced by repeat patch test with sodium lauryl sulfate and assessed by visual methods, transepidermal water loss, and laser Doppler velocimetry. Irritant Contact Derm. 1988; 19: 465
   Google Scholar
• Wilhelm K. ‐P., Freitag G., Wolff H. H. Surfactant‐induced skin irritation and skin repair: Evaluation of a cumulative human irritation model by noninvasive techniques. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 1994; 31(6)981
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agner T., Serup J. Skin reactions to irritants assessed by non‐invasive bioengineering methods. Contact Derm. 1989; 20: 352
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldner R. Clinical tests. Irritant Contact Dermatitis, E. M. Jackson, R. Goldner. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY 1990
   Google Scholar
• Mills O. H., Swinyer L. J., Kligman A. M. Assessment of irritancy of cleansers. 43rd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology, Washington, DC, December, 1–61984
   Google Scholar
• Serup J., Agner T. Colorimetric quantification of erythema—a comparison of two colorimeters with a clinical scoring scheme and laser‐Doppler flowmetry. Clin. Exp. Dermatol. 1990; 15: 267
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tur E., Aviram G., Zeltser D., Brenner S., Maibach H. I. Histamine effect on human cutaneous blood flow: regional variations. Acta Derm. Venereol. (Stockh.) 1994; 74: 113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar