{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021897810218978103, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004562043795620438, 'mean_word_length': 5.304597701149425, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Irritancy of industrial hand cleansers tested by repeated open application on human skin

The aim of this study was to compare the irritancy potential of 2 industrial hand cleansers with a brand leader of “mild” children's hand cleanser and with an emollient. The products were tested using repeated open application tests (ROATs) on the forearms of 40 subjects. Scoring of signs and symptoms (itching or burning), transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and stratum corneum hydration (Corneometer) evaluated responses. On all assessments, the children's hand cleanser was more irritant than the 2 industrial hand cleansers. The children's hand cleanser and industrial hand cleansers were more irritant than the emollient. The finding that a hand cleanser for children was more irritant than 2 industrial hand cleansers was surprising, and one which might hold serious implications for inducing or exacerbating atopic eczema in children. The combination of visual scoring, TEWL and Corneometer readings on ROATs is a potentially useful way of assessing irritancy strength of soap products on human skin.