+1 (609) 455-1112

+44 (0)1245 934050

Patch Testing | HRIPT Clinical Skin Reaction Testing

Patch Testing

Human Repeat Insult Patch Testing (HRIPT) or Skin Reaction Testing as it sometimes known, proves that your ingredients are safe for use in an in vivo situation by using delayed contact testing allowing you to make safety claims on the package regarding allergenicity and hypersensitivity.

Patch Testing

Secondary Irritation Patch Testing (HRIPTS):

  • Jordan & King (Industry Standard).
  • Kligman
  • Shelanski


Claims Substantiated:

  • Dermatologically Tested
  • Dermatologist Tested
  • Dermatology Test
  • Clinically Approved
  • Safe for Skin
  • Mild for Skin


Consultant endorsements also available:

  • Dermatologist Tested – Dermatologist Approved – Pediatrician Approved – Gynecologist Approved


Briefly, what can you expect from Patch Testing:

Jordan and King Method (Industry standard method of patch testing):

  • Develops on the original Draize method of HRIPT, with a three week induction, a one week break and a two week challenge to test whether the potential antigen product has caused the body to elicit reaction.  For this study we use Finn Chambers which are fully-occlusive aluminum chambers that deliver as much of the product as possible to the skin site.


Kligman Method:

  • This method is similar to the Jordan and King method of patch testing, but to maximize the body’s response, we would pre-irritate the site at the start with SLS – sodium lauryl sulphate.  This test ranks products that have minimal potential to sensitize.


Shelanski Method:

  • Human Repeat Insult Patch Tests are used to assess potential allergy to a product and are conducted in a panel of either 50 or 100 volunteers.

An Induction phase is performed for 3 weeks, where 9 consecutive patches are applied to the same skin site on the arms or back for 24 h, three times a week. Each induction site is evaluated for erythema and oedema after removal of the patch.   Two weeks after the last induction, a challenge patch is applied for 24 h and subsequently read at 48h and 96h. The response after challenge is compared to the responses reported after the early induction patches.  The induction patch responses are also noted and interpreted as evidence of cumulative irritation.