Intra- and inter-rater reliabilities of skin mechanical properties measured in healthy individuals using skin elasticity meter

References

• Biggs LC, Kim CS, Miroshnikova YA, et al. Mechanical forces in the skin: roles in tissue architecture, stability, and function. J Invest Dermatol. 2020;140(2):1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2019.06.137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakagawa N, Shimizu N, Sugawara T, et al. The relationship between habitual physical activity and skin mechanical properties. Skin Res Technol. 2021;27(3):353–357. doi: 10.1111/srt.12950.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rorteau J, Chevalier FP, Fromy B, et al. Functional integrity of aging skin, from cutaneous biology to anti-aging strategies. Med Sci (Paris). 2020;36(12):1155–1162. doi: 10.1051/medsci/2020223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Escoffier C, de Rigal J, Rochefort A, et al. Age-related mechanical properties of human skin: an in vivo study. J Invest Dermatol. 1989;93(3):353–357. doi: 10.1111/1523-1747.ep12280259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierard GE, Lapière CM. Physiopathological variations in the mechanical properties of skin. Arch Dermatol Res. 1977;260(3):231–239. doi: 10.1007/BF00561418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong R, Geyer S, Weninger W, et al. The dynamic anatomy and patterning of skin. Exp Dermatol. 2016;25(2):92–98. doi: 10.1111/exd.12832.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohshima H, Kinoshita S, Oyobikawa M, et al. Use of cutometer area parameters in evaluating age-related changes in the skin elasticity of the cheek. Skin Res Technol. 2013;19(1):e238–e242. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.2012.00634.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kearney EM, Messaraa C, Grennan G, et al. Evaluation of skin firmness by the DynaSKIN, a novel non-contact compression device, and its use in revealing the efficacy of a skincare regimen featuring a novel anti-ageing ingredient, acetyl aspartic acid. Skin Res Technol. 2017;23(2):155–168. doi: 10.1111/srt.12314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho YS, Jeon JH, Hong A, et al. The effect of burn rehabilitation massage therapy on hypertrophic scar after burn: a randomized controlled trial. Burns. 2014;40(8):1513–1520. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2014.02.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobrev H. Use of cutometer to assess dermal oedema in erysipelas of the lower legs. Skin Res Technol. 1998;4(3):155–159. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.1998.tb00102.x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Müller B, Ruby L, Jordan S, et al. Validation of the suction device nimble for the assessment of skin fibrosis in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2020;22(1):128. doi: 10.1186/s13075-020-02214-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klimitz FJ, Neubauer H, Stolle A, et al. Objective burn scar assessment in clinical practice using the cutometer©: introduction and validation of a standardized measurement protocol. J Burn Care Res. 2023;44(1):95–105. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irac154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham HK, McConnell JC, Limbert G, et al. How stiff is skin? Exp Dermatol. 2019;28(S1):4–9. doi: 10.1111/exd.13826.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kitamura K, Iwase S, Komoike Y, et al. Evidence-based practice guideline for the management of lymphedema proposed by the Japanese Lymphedema Society. Lymphat Res Biol. 2022;20(5):539–547. doi: 10.1089/lrb.2021.0032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–163. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;327(8476):307–310. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee SY, Cho YS, Kim L, et al. The intra-rater reliability and validity of ultrasonography in the evaluation of hypertrophic scars caused by burns. Burns. 2023;49(2):344–352. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2022.03.016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nedelec B, Correa JA, Rachelska G, et al. Quantitative measurement of hypertrophic scar: intrarater reliability, sensitivity, and specificity. J Burn Care Res. 2008;29(3):489–500. doi: 10.1097/BCR.0b013e3181710869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Draaijers LJ, Botman YA, Tempelman FR, et al. Skin elasticity meter or subjective evaluation in scars: a reliability assessment. Burns. 2004;30(2):109–114. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2003.09.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enomoto DN, Mekkes JR, Bossuyt PM, et al. Quantification of cutaneous sclerosis with a skin elasticity meter in patients with generalized scleroderma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1996;35(3 Pt 1):381–387. doi: 10.1016/s0190-9622(96)90601-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashmi F, Wright C, Nester C, et al. The reliability of non-invasive biophysical outcome measures for evaluating normal and hyperkeratotic foot skin. J Foot Ankle Res. 2015;8(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s13047-015-0083-8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rennekampff HO, Rabbels J, Reinhard V, et al. Comparing the Vancouver Scar Scale with the cutometer in the assessment of donor site wounds treated with various dressings in a randomized trial. J Burn Care Res. 2006;27(3):345–351. doi: 10.1097/01.BCR.0000216311.61266.00.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyack Z, Wasiak J, Spinks A, et al. A guide to choosing a burn scar rating scale for clinical or research use. Burns. 2013;39(7):1341–1350. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2013.04.021.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrière ME, Kwa KAA, de Haas LEM, et al. Systematic review on the content of outcome measurement instruments on scar quality. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019;7(9):e2424. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002424.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Takahashi Y, Fujino Y, Miura K, et al. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of rectus femoris muscle thickness measured using ultrasonography in healthy individuals. Ultrasound J. 2021;13(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s13089-021-00224-8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bonaparte JP, Ellis D, Chung J. The effect of probe to skin contact force on cutometer MPA 580 measurements. J Med Eng Technol. 2013;37(3):208–212. doi: 10.3109/03091902.2013.779325.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mueller B, Elrod J, Distler O, et al. On the reliability of suction measurements for skin characterization. J Biomech Eng. 2021;143(2):021002. doi: 10.1115/1.4047661.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller B, Elrod J, Pensalfini M, et al. A novel ultra-light suction device for mechanical characterization of skin. PLOS One. 2018;13(8):e0201440. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar