# Assessing Skin Barrier Integrity: A Comparative Study Using Transepidermal Water Loss, Electrical Impedance Spectroscopy and Corneometry

## TL;DR

This study compares methods to assess skin barrier damage and finds that electrical impedance spectroscopy aligns well with existing techniques.

## Contribution

The study introduces electrical impedance spectroscopy as a novel, non-invasive method for evaluating skin barrier integrity in humans.

## Key findings

- D-Squame tape caused stronger barrier impairment than other tapes.
- Combined mechanical and chemical stress (SLS + TS) induced the most persistent disruption.
- EIS correlated strongly with TEWL and CM measurements.

## Abstract

Skin barrier disruption can be induced through experimental models, yet standardised comparisons are scarce. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and corneometry (CM) are established methods to quantify barrier impairment. Electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) is a novel approach, which may provide complementary information.

To compare EIS against TEWL and CM and to assess different barrier disruption models in humans in vivo.

15 healthy adults (7 female, 8 male; median age 27 years) were recruited. Experiment I compared 3 adhesive tapes for tape stripping (TS). Experiment II evaluated TS, 0.5% sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS), SLS + TS, and gluten using TEWL, EIS, and CM.

D‐Squame tape caused stronger barrier impairment than Scotch and Tesa (TEWL p < 0.01, EIS p < 0.05). SLS + TS induced the most (8 h: TEWL p < 0.001; EIS p < 0.05; CM p < 0.05) and persistent disruption (24 h: TEWL p < 0.05, EIS p < 0.05), followed by TS (8 h: TEWL p < 0.01; EIS p < 0.05). SLS and aqua caused minor, non‐significant effects; gluten had no measurable impact. EIS correlated strongly with TEWL (ρ = −0.62, p < 0.0001) and CM (ρ = −0.61, p < 0.0001).

This first human study of EIS after experimental barrier disruption demonstrated strong concordance with TEWL and CM. Combined mechanical and chemical stress best reflects real‐life barrier insults and represents a potent model.

This study compares experimental models of human skin barrier disruption and evaluates non‐invasive assessment methods. It highlights electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) as a novel tool of quantifying skin barrier damage and supports methodological standardisation and an improved understanding of barrier dysfunction under real‐world conditions.