Effects of one year of daily face mask wearing on the skin during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

Efficacy of a moisturizing cream and facial mask for alleviating skin problems associated with medical mask use: A half-face, randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Prolonged use of medical masks has increased skin-related issues.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of a facial cream and facial mask in mitigating medical mask related skin symptoms.

METHODS

Healthy women were randomly assigned to apply a facial cream (n = 32) or a facial mask plus a facial cream (n = 32) on half-faces after wearing medical masks for 4 h (Tb). Transepidermal water loss (TEWL), dryness score, and redness area were assessed at Tb and 10 min after using the cream (T1) in the facial cream group, and at Tb, 1 h after using the facial mask (T2), and 10 min after using the cream (T3) in the combined use group.

RESULTS

In the facial cream group, the treated half-face showed significantly better improvements from Tb to T1 in TEWL (-2.95 ± 0.38 vs. -0.68 ± 0.35 g/h·cm2, p < 0.001) and skin dryness score (-1.00 ± 0.12 vs. 0.00 ± 0.00, p < 0.001). In the combined use group, the treated half-face showed significantly better improvements from Tb to T2 and T3 in TEWL (T2, -3.46 ± 0.33 vs. -0.09 ± 0.13 g/h·cm2; T3, -4.67 ± 0.31 vs. -0.28 ± 0.22 g/h·cm2) and skin dryness score (T2, -0.63 ± 0.13 vs. 0.03 ± 0.03; T3, -0.94 ± 0.17 vs. 0.19 ± 0.07) (all p < 0.001) then the untreated half-face. The combined use group had significantly lower TEWL at T3 than T2 (p < 0.05). The reduction in redness area was similar between the treated and untreated half-faces in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The test facial cream and mask significantly improved skin barrier function and alleviated dryness symptoms associated with medical mask use, with the combined use offering superior benefits.

Does sensitive skin lie in epidermal barrier impairment or abnormalities? Results from an observational study assessing biophysical parameters

BACKGROUND

The pathophysiology of sensitive skin is largely unknown and no univocal data on the role of the epidermal barrier impairment have been identified. The aim of this study was to assess whether subjects with or without sensitive skin differ for some biophysical skin parameters, which reflect skin barrier integrity or skin hyperactivity.

METHODS

This observational, cross-sectional study included adult volunteers not affected with chronic inflammatory skin diseases who attended the Unit of Dermatology and the Center of Cosmetology of the University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy, between March 2021 and November 2022. All subjects, subdivided into those with or without sensitive skin, based on either Lactic Acid Stinging Test (LAST) result or a questionnaire-based skin sensitivity score ≥4, were tested for transepidermal water loss (TEWL), skin elasticity and hydrations and dermographism.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-seven subjects were included. No significant differences in terms of TEWL, elasticity and hydration levels were recorded between subjects with sensitive skin and those without, subdivided according to both the LAST result and the questionnaire score. Dermographism was elicited more in subjects with sensitive skin than in the others, although without statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

The study failed to find significant biophysical differences between sensitive and non-sensitive skin. Therefore, the role of skin barrier impairment does not appear to be a necessary condition in determining an abnormal skin sensitivity to potentially unpleasant and irritating stimuli. These findings indirectly support the relevance of a peripheral sensory neural hyperactivity in the pathophysiology of sensitive skin.