背景:尽管非侵入性诊断方法被广泛用于检查指甲器械(NA),对健康的研究很少,分析通常是在小组中进行的。在文学中,只有少数关于TOWL测量的报告。到目前为止,TEWL在近端甲褶中的研究结果尚未发表。
方法:基于详细的访谈和体检,81名年龄在22至65岁之间的志愿者(40名女性和41名男性)符合该研究的资格。在这项研究中,首次对与失水有关的NA进行了全面检查,关于手(d,支配;n,非显性)和手指类型(数字,从拇指开始计数)以及性别和年龄。
结果:整个组中的平均TEWL值范围从手指nd4中的7.53c.u.到nd1中的11.09c.u.。无论是在支配和非支配手中,在整个分析小组中,考虑到性别,手指类型值与TEWL之间存在微弱的统计学差异(p<0.05)。TEWL值越低,远离拇指,整个组中的平均TOWL值在d1中的5.01c.u.到d5中的7.34c.u.范围内。无论是在支配和非支配手中,在整个分析小组中,考虑到性别,在手指类型和TOWL值之间观察到统计学上显著的关系(p<0.05)。TOWL值越高,远离拇指。随后,TOWL和TEWL的值不取决于手的类型(优势或非优势),性别和年龄。在整个研究组和女性中,TEWL和TOWL值之间存在弱和中等的统计学显着相关性,以及男性的选定手指(d2,nd2,d3,nd3,d5,nd5)(p<0.05,r<0.27)。
结论:非侵入性诊断,如TEWL和TOWL测量,可用于评估手指类型之间结构和功能的差异。然而,获得的结果需要进一步的研究。
BACKGROUND: Although non-invasive diagnostic methods are widely used to examine the nail apparatus (NA), studies in healthy ones are scarce, and analyzes were often conducted in small groups. In the literature, there are only a few reports on TOWL measurements. The results of TEWL studies in the proximal nailfold have not been published so far.
METHODS: Based on a detailed interview and physical examination, 81 volunteers (40 women and 41 men) aged from 22 to 65 years were qualified for the study. In this study, the overall examination of the NA in relation to water loss was performed for the first time, regarding the hand (d, dominant; n, non-dominant) and finger types (number, start of count from thumbs) as well as sex and age.
RESULTS: The average TEWL value in the entire group ranged from 7.53 c.u. in the finger nd4 to 11.09 c.u. in nd1. Both in the dominant and non-dominant hand, in the entire analyzed group, and taking into account gender, weak statistically significant relationships were observed between the finger type value and TEWL (p < 0.05).The TEWL values were lower moving away from the thumb, The average TOWL value in the entire group ranged from 5.01 c.u. in d1 to 7.34 c.u. in d5. Both in the dominant and non-dominant hand, in the entire analyzed group and considering gender, statistically significant relationships were observed between the type of finger and TOWL values (p < 0.05). The TOWL values were higher moving away from the thumb. Subsequently, the values of TOWL and TEWL did not depend on type of hand (dominant or non-dominant), sex and age. Weak and moderate statistically significant correlations were found between TEWL and TOWL values in the entire study group and in females, as well as in selected fingers in males (d2, nd2, d3, nd3, d5, nd5) (p < 0.05, r < 0.27).
CONCLUSIONS: Non-invasive diagnostics such TEWL and TOWL measurements are useful to assess differences in structure and function between types of fingers. However, obtained results demand further studies.