0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A comparison of the effect of indoor thermal and humidity condition on young and older adults' comfort and skin condition in winter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Dry indoor air has been identified as the main cause of dry skin in winter which greatly affects older occupants' wellbeing, but HVAC design standards are based on average adults and do not specify a humidity level that can prevent dry skin. A field study was carried out to understand the difference between the younger and older people with regards to thermal and humidity comfort and skin condition in winter. The study proves a research procedure that is friendly to and preferred by the participants to measure the effect of the indoor environment on their comfort and skin condition in a real living environment setting. The results suggest that younger and older occupants are different in thermal comfort, specifically older occupants prefer a warmer environment than younger occupants, and the neutral temperature produced by the predicted mean vote method is not warm enough for older occupants. The study also suggests stratum corneum hydration appears to be a good indicator to present the effect of indoor humidity on the occupants' skin condition, which can be used to determine the minimum humidity level to reduce the risk of suffering dry skin in winter.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Indoor and outdoor falls in older adults are different: the maintenance of balance, independent living, intellect, and Zest in the Elderly of Boston Study.

          To identify risk factors for indoor and outdoor falls. Prospective cohort study. The MOBILIZE Boston Study, a study of falls etiology in community-dwelling older individuals. Seven hundred sixty-five women and men, mainly aged 70 and older, from randomly sampled households in the Boston, Massachusetts, area. Baseline data were collected by questionnaire and comprehensive clinic examination. During follow-up, participants recorded falls on daily calendars. The location and circumstances of each fall were asked during telephone interviews. Five hundred ninety-eight indoor and 524 outdoor falls were reported over a median follow-up of 21.7 months. Risk factors for indoor falls included older age, being female, and various indicators of poor health. Risk factors for outdoor falls included younger age, being male, and being relatively physically active and healthy. For instance, the age- and sex-adjusted rate ratio for having much difficulty or inability to perform activities of daily living relative to no difficulty was 2.57 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.69-3.90) for indoor falls but 0.27 (95% CI = 0.13-0.56) for outdoor falls. The rate ratio for gait speed of less than 0.68 m/s relative to a speed of greater than 1.33 m/s was 1.48 (95% CI = 0.81-2.68) for indoor falls but 0.27 (95% CI = 0.15-0.50) for outdoor falls. Risk factors for indoor and outdoor falls differ. Combining these falls, as is done in many studies, masks important information. Prevention recommendations for noninstitutionalized older people would probably be more effective if targeted differently for frail, inactive older people at high risk for indoor falls and relatively active, healthy people at high risk for outdoor falls. © 2010, Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation © 2010, The American Geriatrics Society.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Multicentre comparison of skin hydration in terms of physical-, physiological- and product-dependent parameters by the capacitive method (Corneometer CM 825).

            A multicentre study for measuring skin hydration with 349 volunteers was carried out in six different laboratories. The purpose of the study was to investigate physical-, physiological- and product-dependent parameters of three test emulsions (base, base + moisturizer and base + moisturizer + lipids) in a double-blind study. A comparison between analogous and digital sensor technology of the Corneometer CM825 was examined. Here, a clear relationship between both sensor types could be highlighted. A vital point of the study was the division of the test subjects according to their skin type. To get more objective limits for three different skin types - very dry, dry and normal skin - visual expert evaluation, self-assessment and hydration measurements were analysed by means of statistical methods. The moisture-related skin types were determined as follows: very dry skin was characterized with corneometer units below 30, dry skin between 30 and 40 and normal skin higher than 40 a.u. (arbitrary units). The efficacy of the three test emulsions was examined in relation to the mentioned skin types. Analysing the measured data of all test centres, a clear dependency of skin physiology (skin type) and product efficacy became evident. The drier the skin, the higher the increase of hydration. The product performance of the three test emulsions compared to the untreated control resulted in a significant increase of skin hydration in all measuring centres. The evaluation of a product ranking showed a good differentiation between the basic emulsion and the two other products. An increase of efficacy by adding lipids could be observed in four of six centres. The important influence of the skin type of the volunteers on the degree of product performance, as demonstrated in this study, should be especially considered when drawing up guidelines for efficacy testing.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Non-invasive in vivo methods for investigation of the skin barrier physical properties.

              Skin as an organ of protection covers the body and accomplishes multiple defensive functions. The intact skin represents a barrier to the uncontrolled loss of water, proteins, and plasma components from the organism. Due to its complex structure, the epidermal barrier with its major component, stratum corneum, is the rate-limiting unit for the penetration of exogenous substances through the skin. The epidermal barrier is not a static structure. The permeability barrier status can be modified by different external and internal factors such as climate, physical stressors, and a number of skin and systemic diseases. Today, different non-invasive approaches are used to monitor the skin barrier physical properties in vivo. The quantification of parameters such as transepidermal water loss, stratum corneum hydration, and skin surface acidity is essential for the integral evaluation of the epidermal barrier status. Novel methods such as in vivo confocal Raman microspectroscopy offer the possibility for precise and detailed characterization of the skin barrier. This paper will allow the readership to get acquainted with the non-invasive, in vivo methods for the investigation of the skin barrier.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Indoor and Built Environment
                Indoor and Built Environment
                SAGE Publications
                1420-326X
                1423-0070
                March 2022
                August 09 2021
                March 2022
                : 31
                : 3
                : 759-776
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Environment, Xihua University, Xihua University, Chengdu, China
                [2 ]School of Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure and Society, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK
                [3 ]Centre for Inflammation Research, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
                Article
                10.1177/1420326X211030998
                5bf86699-c7a5-4f56-9fa7-98763855d435
                © 2022

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article