Short-term and Long-term Effects of Electrical Stimulation on Skin Properties

• Published in: Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy Vol. 18; no. 3; pp. 157 - 166
• Main Authors: Almalty, Abdul-Majeed R., Hamed, Saja H., Al-Dabbak, Fuad M., Shallan, Amjad E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.09.2013
• Subjects: Adult; Biophysical Phenomena; Color; Elasticity; Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods; electrical stimulation; Humans; Iontophoresis; Male; Skin Physiological Phenomena; skin properties; transepidemal water loss; Water Loss, Insensible; Young Adult; electrical stimulation; transepidemal water loss; skin properties; iontophoresis
• ISSN: 1358-2267; 1471-2865
• DOI: 10.1002/pri.1543

Background Electrical stimulation (ES) has been used in treating different medical conditions; however, not much is known about the effect of this application on skin properties. The purpose of this study was to investigate the short‐term and long‐term effects of ES on biophysical properties of the skin. Methods A pretest–posttest control design was used in the study. Thirteen men (N = 13, age (M ± SD), 19 ± 5.6 years) were free of skin abnormality on the volar aspect of both forearms. Four areas were allocated and marked with a layout template of two circles 2 cm in diameter and 2 cm apart. Areas 1 and 2 were allocated on the experimental forearm and area 3 and 4 on the control forearm. ES was applied for 15 minutes with two rubber electrodes 8 cm apart surrounding areas 1 and 2 on the experimental forearm three times a week for 2 weeks. Skin properties including transepidermal water loss (TEWL), melanin content, erythema, elasticity and pH were measured pre‐ES, during ES and post‐ES, and after 2 weeks of applying ES to find out the short‐term and long‐term effects on skin. Results The TEWL was increased during ES at 7, 15 and 15‐minutes post‐ES compared with the baseline (p < 0.01) and to the control forearm (p = 0.04) measurements, and no increase have been noticed of TEWL on the control forearm (p = 0.11). Also, we found no difference in the other skin properties (p > 0.05) on both forearms, and there were no long‐term effects (p > 0.05) in any tested variable. Conclusion Electrical stimulation caused temporary increase in TEWL with no effects on other skin properties. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.