title: Effectiveness of topical skin care provided in aged care facilities.
abstract: Background  The 2001 Australian census revealed that adults aged 65 years and over constituted 12.6% of the population, up from 12.1% in 1996. It is projected that this figure will rise to 21% or 5.1 million Australians by 2031. In 1998, 6% (134 000) of adults in Australia aged 65 years and over were residing in nursing homes or hostels and this number is also expected to rise. As skin ages, there is a decreased turnover and replacement of epidermal skin cells, a thinning subcutaneous fat layer and a reduced production of protective oils. These changes can affect the normal functions of the skin such as its role as a barrier to irritants and pathogens, temperature and water regulation. Generally, placement in a long-term care facility indicates an inability of the older person to perform all of the activities of daily living such as skin care. Therefore, skin care management protocols should be available to reduce the likelihood of skin irritation and breakdown and ultimately promote comfort of the older person. Objectives  The objective of this review was to determine the best available evidence for the effectiveness and safety of topical skin care regimens for older adults residing in long-term aged care facilities. The primary outcome was the incidence of adverse skin conditions with patient satisfaction considered as a secondary outcome. Search strategy  A literature search was performed using the following databases: PubMed (NLM) (1966-4/2003), Embase (1966-4/2003), CINAHL (1966-4/2003), Current Contents (1993-4/2003), Cochrane Library (1966-2/2003), Web of Science (1995-12/2002), Science Citation Index Expanded and ProceedingsFirst (1993-12/2002). Health Technology Assessment websites were also searched. No language restrictions were applied. Selection criteria  Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials, randomised and non-randomised controlled trials evaluating any non-medical intervention or program that aimed to maintain or improve the integrity of skin in older adults were considered for inclusion. Participants were 65 years of age or over and residing in an aged care facility, hospital or long-term care in the community. Studies were excluded if they evaluated pressure-relieving techniques for the prevention of skin breakdown. Data collection and analysis  Two independent reviewers assessed study eligibility for inclusion. Study design and quality were tabulated and relative risks, odds ratios, mean differences and associated 95% confidence intervals were calculated from individual comparative studies containing count data. Results  The resulting evidence of the effectiveness of topical skin care interventions was variable and dependent upon the skin condition outcome being assessed. The strongest evidence for maintenance of skin condition in incontinent patients found that disposable bodyworn incontinence protection reduced the odds of deterioration of skin condition compared with non-disposable bodyworns. The best evidence for non-pressure relieving topical skin care interventions on pressure sore formation found the no-rinse cleanser Clinisan to be more effective than soap and water at maintaining healthy skin (no ulcers) in elderly incontinent patients in long-term care. The quality of studies examining the effectiveness of topical skin care interventions on the incidence of skin tears was very poor and inconclusive. Topical skin care for prevention of dermatitis found that Sudocrem could reduce the redness of skin compared with zinc cream if applied regularly after each pad change, but not the number of lesions. Topical skin care on dry skin found the Bag Bath/Travel Bath no-rinse skin care cleanser to be more effective at preventing overall skin dryness and most specifically flaking and scaling when compared with the traditional soap and water washing method in residents of a long-term care facility. Information on the safety of topical skin care interventions is lacking. Therefore, because of the lack of evidence, no recommendation on the safety on any intervention included in this review can be made.
authors.affiliation: Queensland Evaluation Group, School of Population Health, University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, and LaTrobe University Gerontic Nursing Clinical School, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
authors.forename: Brent
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Hodgkinson
authors.forename: Rhonda
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Nay