乙氧基化改性油脂对改善皮肤保湿效果的研究分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2097-2806.2026.09.003

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

对天然甘油三酯添加环氧乙烷（EO）进行改性，合成数种非离子表面活性剂，通过对比选用巴巴苏油、乳木果油两种油脂分别添加60%，65%，70% EO，探索不同EO含量对乙氧化物作为化妆品保湿剂应用性能的影响。并与市售水溶性巴巴苏油、市售水溶性乳木果油（聚甘油醚类）进行对比。使用人体皮肤含水量值（MMV值）测试、人体经表皮失水值（TEWL值）测试对产品进行功效对比，与恒温条件下不同湿度的体外称重法结果进行联合分析，以保湿率为评价指标判断样品的保湿效果。实验结果表明，巴巴苏油和乳木果油进行乙氧基化改性后具有良好的保湿效果，与市售原料样品对比，自制乙氧基化非离子表面活性剂具有更稳定且长效的保湿效果，并对可能的原因进行了分析。同时发现样品具有良好的卸妆功效，为保湿化妆品原料提供了新的选择。

关键词: 非离子表面活性剂, 功效评价, 化妆品保湿, 人体经表皮失水值, 卸妆

Abstract:

Natural triglycerides were modified by adding ethylene oxide （EO） to synthesize several nonionic surfactants. Through comparative analysis, babassu oil and shea butter were selected, with 60%, 65%, and 70% EO added to explore the effects of varying EO content on the performance of ethoxylated compounds as cosmetic moisturizers. The results were compared with commercially available water-soluble babassu oil and water-soluble shea butter （polyglyceryl ethers）. The efficacy of the products was evaluated using human skin moisture content （MMV） tests and transepidermal water loss （TEWL） tests, and the results were jointly analyzed with in vitro gravimetric measurements under constant temperature and varying humidity conditions. The moisturizing rate was used as the evaluation metric to determine the effectiveness of the samples. The experimental results showed that ethoxylated babassu oil and shea butter exhibited excellent moisturizing effects. Compared to commercially available raw material samples, the self-prepared ethoxylated nonionic surfactants demonstrated more stable and long-lasting moisturizing performance, with possible reasons analyzed. Additionally, it was found that the samples had good cleansing efficacy, providing a new option for moisturizing cosmetic ingredients.

Key words: non-ionic surfactants, efficacy evaluation, moisturizing cosmetics, TEWL, makeup removal

中图分类号:

TQ423

闫梦瑶, 梁慧斌, 赵永杰, 孙晋源, 张科, 周婧洁, 耿涛. 乙氧基化改性油脂对改善皮肤保湿效果的研究分析[J]. 日用化学工业（中英文）, 2026, 56(9): 1144-1157.

Mengyao Yan, Huibin Liang, Yongjie Zhao, Jinyuan Sun, Ke Zhang, Jingjie Zhou, Tao Geng. Research and analysis of ethoxylated modified oils for improving skin moisturizing effect[J]. China Surfactant Detergent & Cosmetics, 2026, 56(9): 1144-1157.

图/表 15

参考文献 40

[1]	Algiert-Zielińska B, Mucha P, Rotsztejn H. Lactic and lactobionic acids as typically moisturizing compounds[J]. International Journal of Dermatology, 2019, 58 (3) : 374-379. doi: 10.1111/ijd.14202 pmid: 30270529
[2]	Meng Hong, Li Jiarui, Dong Yinmao, et al. Poly traditional Chinese medicine formulation prepared with skin moisturizing properties[J]. Dermatologic Therapy, 2020, 33 (6). DOI: 10.1111/dth.14105.
[3]	Mehta P, Picken H, White C, et al. Engineering optimisation of commercial facemask formulations capable of improving skin moisturisation[J]. International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 2019, 41 (5) : 462-471. doi: 10.1111/ics.12560 pmid: 31318061
[4]	Lourith N, Kanlayavattanakul M. Ceylon spinach: A promising crop for skin hydrating products[J]. Industrial Crops and Products, 2017, 105: 24-28. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.05.002
[5]	Altunisik N, Tetik B K, Mete B. Evaluation of awareness regarding skin moisturisation and moisturiser usage frequency in individuals over 65 years of age[J]. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 2020, 39(4) : 247-252.
[6]	Jeffrey R, Neha C, Peter L, et al. The skin barrier and moisturization: Function, disruption, and mechanisms of repair[J]. Skin Pharmacology and Physiology, 2023, 36 (4) : 174-185. doi: 10.1159/000534136 pmid: 37717558
[7]	Geunchang C, Do-Hee L, Ikpyeong P, et al. Evaluation of moisturizing cream using terahertz time-domain spectroscopy[J]. Current Applied Physics, 2022, 39: 84-89. doi: 10.1016/j.cap.2022.04.002
[8]	Paula M, Kelly H, Gianina P, et al. Assessment of the moisturizing properties of a magnetic mask containing iron oxide particles[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2019, 18 (3) : 835-842. doi: 10.1111/jocd.12717 pmid: 30043423
[9]	Nina M, Jyotsna D, Krunal D, et al. Revitalizing the skin: Exploring the role of barrier repair moisturizers[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2024, 23 (5) : 1533-1540. doi: 10.1111/jocd.16171 pmid: 38214440
[10]	Sachin G, Ramam M, Sharma V K, et al. Evaluation of a paraffin‐based moisturizer compared to a ceramide-based moisturizer in children with atopic dermatitis: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial[J]. Pediatric Dermatology, 2023, 40 (4) : 627-632. doi: 10.1111/pde.15355 pmid: 37269189
[11]	Mayrovitz H N, Deehan E, Ruppe M, et al. Skin tone parameters as possible factors in humectant moisturizing effectiveness[J]. Cureus, 2025. DOI:10.7759/cureus.86665.
[12]	Eva M, Rui R L, Tiago S H. In vivo skin hydrating efficacy of fish collagen from greenlandhalibut as a high-value active ingredient for cosmetic applications[J]. Marine Drugs, 2023, 21 (2) : 57.
[13]	Jemec G B E, Christian W H. The plastic sing effect of moisturizers on human skin in vivo: a measure of moisturizing potency?[J]. Skin Research and Technology, 1998, 4 (2) : 88-93. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.1998.tb00092.x pmid: 27332105
[14]	Zhang Tong, Guo Qiwei, Xin Yu, et al. Comprehensive review in moisture retention mechanism of polysaccharides from algae, plants, bacteria and fungus[J]. Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 2022, 15(10) : 104163.
[15]	Zhao Jian, Zhang Xiongxiong, Piao Hongwei, et al. Collagen peptide/poly(ethylene oxide) nanofiber facial mask with enhanced moisturizing and antioxidant performance[J]. ACS Applied PolumerMaterrials, 2025. DOI:10.1021/acsapm.5c02084.
[16]	Wichuda S, Wongnapa N, Pensri C, et al. Evaluation of moisturizing and irritation potential of sachainchi oil[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2020, 19 (4) : 915-924. doi: 10.1111/jocd.13099 pmid: 31441999
[17]	Barreto S M A G, Maia M S, Benicá A M, et al. Evaluation of in vitro and in vivo safety of the by-product of Agave sisalana as a new cosmetic raw material: Development and clinical evaluation of a nanoemulsion to improve skin moisturizing[J]. Industrial Crops and Products, 2017, 108: 470-479. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.06.064
[18]	Tao Yongduo. Properties and applications of natural oil ethoxylates[D]. Taiyuan: China Research Institute of Daily Chemical Industry, 2015.
[19]	Technical committee for standardization of surface active agents in chemical industry. Surface active agents-determination of emulsifying power-colorimetric method: GB/T 6369-2008[S]. China: Standards Press of China, 2008.
[20]	Chen H J, Lee P Y, Chen C Y, et al. Moisture retention of glycerin solutions with various concentrations: A comparative study[J]. Scientific Reports, 2022, 12 (1) : 10232.
[21]	Yang Fan, Guo Miao, Zhu Jinjin, et al. Clinical evaluation of a multi-component facial mask for moisturizing, repairing, and anti-aging effects[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2025, 24 (8) : e70355.
[22]	Klotz T, Moran H, Vu P, et al. Commonly recommended moisturising products: Effect on transepidermal water loss and hydration in a scar model[J]. Burns, 2025, 51 (8) : 107629.
[23]	Chen Yuyan, Chi Jing, Shen Tianshu, et al. A multi-granularity facial extreme makeup transfer and removal model with local-global collaboration[J]. Applied Intelligence, 2024, 54 (20) : 9741-9759. doi: 10.1007/s10489-024-05692-8
[24]	Tsukiyama J, Miyamoto Y, Kodama A, et al. Cosmetic cleansing oil absorption by soft contact lenses in dry and wet conditions[J]. Eye & Contact Lens: Science & Clinical Practice, 2017, 43 (5) : 318-323.
[25]	Setsiripakdee A, Lourith N, Kanlayavattanakul M. In vitro and in vivo removal efficacies of a formulated pumpkin seed oil makeup remover[J]. Journal of Surfactants and Detergents, 2019, 22 (6) : 1461-1467. doi: 10.1002/jsde.12315
[26]	Pakkang N, Uraki Y, Koda K, et al. Preparation of water-in-oil microemulsion from the mixtures of castor oil and sunflower oil as makeup remover[J]. Journal of Surfactants and Detergents, 2018, 21(6) : 809-816. doi: 10.1002/jsde.2018.21.issue-6
[27]	Hosokawa K, Taima H, Kikuchi M, et al. Rubbing the skin when removing makeup cosmetics is a major factor that worsens skin conditions in atopic dermatitis patients[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2021, 20 (6) : 1915-1922. doi: 10.1111/jocd.13777 pmid: 33040474
[28]	Pawlikowska P, Tayoun T, Oulhen M, et al. Exploitation of the chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) as a platform for anti-metastatic drug testing[J]. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10 (1) : 16876.
[29]	Budpud K, Okeyoshi K, Kobayashi S, et al. Super-moisturizing materials from morphological deformation of suprapolysaccharides[J]. Macromolecular Rapid Communications, 2022, 43 (11) : 2200163.
[30]	Yu J Y, Jang A Y, Park J H. Comparative analysis of skin condition after using cleansing oil and cleansing water for removing facial makeup[J]. Medico-Legal Update, 2019, 19 (2) : 526.
[31]	Lee H, Lee K, Kim M, et al. Synergistic moisturizing effect of a cellulose nanofibril/hyaluronic acid/poly-γ-glutamic acid blend system[J]. Cellulose, 2025, 32 (8) : 4781-4796. doi: 10.1007/s10570-025-06535-6
[32]	Ning R, Feng C, Zhang F, et al. Synthesis and characterization of superhigh moisturizing carboxymethyl tamarind xyloglucan and its potential application in cosmetics[J]. Biomacromolecules, 2025, 26(3) : 1647-1658. doi: 10.1021/acs.biomac.4c01453 pmid: 39909484
[33]	Voegeli R, Rawlings A V. Moisturizing at a molecular level-The basis of corneocare[J]. International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 2023, 45 (2) : 133-154. doi: 10.1111/ics.v45.2
[34]	Nguyen K H, Pham L D, Nguyen T TT, et al. Moisturizing effectiveness of immediate compared with delayed moisturization[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2022, 21 (10) : 5134-5140. doi: 10.1111/jocd.v21.10
[35]	Seok-Young K, Ji-Young U, Bo-Young C, et al. Moisturizer in patients with inflammatory skin diseases[J]. Medicina, 2022, 58 (7) : 888.
[36]	Draelos Z D, Nelson D B. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of an emollient‐rich moisturizer developed to address three critical elements of natural moisturization[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2025, 24 (4) : e70085.
[37]	McDaniel D H, Dover J S, Wortzman M, et al. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of a moisture treatment cream containing three critical elements of natural skin moisturization[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2020, 19 (5) : 1121-1128. doi: 10.1111/jocd.13359 pmid: 32141711
[38]	Anusha R, Akhila N, Nikhitha J, et al. Formulation and evaluation of herbal hair serum-a review[J]. International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology, 2023, 12 (5) : 759-765.
[39]	Ren Hankun, Zha Peina, Liu Yueheng, et al. Study on moisturizing effect of dendrobium officinale, sparassis crispa, and their compound extracts[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2025, 24 (4) : e70189.
[40]	Barnes T M, Mijaljica D, Townley J P, et al. Vehicles for drug delivery and cosmetic moisturizers: Review and comparison[J]. Pharmaceutics, 2021, 13 (12) : 2012.

Result evaluation method		Stimulus rating method
Stimulation score	Stimulation classification	Stimulation score	Stimulation classification
ES ≤ 12	No/mild irritation	IS < 1	No irritation
12 < ES < 16	Moderate irritation	1 ≤ IS < 5	Mild irritation
ES ≥ 16	Strong irritation/corrosivity	5 ≤ IS < 10	Moderate irritation
		IS ≥10	Strong irritation/corrosion

Sample	Ethylene oxide content/%	Saponification value	Average molar mass/ （g/mol）	EO additive number
Babassu oil 1560	62.38	67.77	1 241.70	8
Babassu oil 1565	66.06	64.28	1 389.76	11
Babassu oil 1570	70.81	50.84	1 655.21	17
Shea butter oil 1565	66.43	68.83	1 254.66	7
Shea butter oil 1570	70.28	49.12	1 713.15	17
Commercially available water-soluble babassu oil	72.93	60.33	929.03	—
Commercially available water-soluble shea butter oil	70.08	38.51	1 457.11	—
Babassu oil	—	186.60	901.93	—
Shea butter oil	—	174.21	966.08	—

Sample	cmc/ （mol/L）	γ_cmc/ （mN/m）	Γ_max/ （μmol/m²）	A_min/nm²	pc₂₀	ΔG^θ_mic/ （kJ/mol）	ΔG^θ_ads/ （kJ/mol）
Babassu oil 1560	3.68×10^-4	43.42	4.16	0.39	4.93	-29.56	-29.63
Babassu oil 1565	3.18×10^-5	46.20	2.57	0.65	5.11	-35.63	-35.74
Babassu oil 1570	2.80×10^-5	46.48	4.11	0.40	4.91	-35.94	-36.00
Shea butter oil 1565	3.71×10^-5	44.48	2.66	0.62	4.86	-35.24	-35.36
Shea butter oil 1570	5.79×10^-5	44.31	2.11	0.79	4.83	-34.14	-34.28
Commercially available water-soluble babassu oil	3.14×10^-5	35.62	3.104	0.53	5.46	-35.36	-35.47
Commercially available water-soluble shea butter oil	1.03×10^-5	38.49	4.905	0.34	5.47	-36.83	-36.96

Sample	1H		4H		7H		24H
Sample	Moisturizing rate/%	RSD/ %	Moisturizing rate/%	RSD/ %	Moisturizing rate/%	RSD/ %	Moisturizing rate/%	RSD/ %
Babassu oil 1565	107.06	1.3	108.72	1.7	109.33	3.0	109.07	3.0
Commercially available water-soluble babassu oil	113.70	1.7	118.49	1.3	119.46	2.5	121.51	2.3
Shea butter oil 1565	103.00	0.7	103.94	1.7	105.24	1.4	105.86	1.3
Commercially available water-soluble shea butter oil	110.21	0.8	115.59	3.2	117.38	3.1	115.52	2.9
Babassu 1560	107.43	0.6	113.14	5.3	112.19	0.8	108.95	3.1
Babassu 1570	113.06	3.4	127.39	1.4	148.08	0.7	128.54	1.1
Shea butter 1570	115.67	1.7	117.38	1.3	118.33	2.5	111.51	2.2

Sample	1H		4H		7H		24H
Sample	Moisturizing rate/%	RSD/ %	Moisturizing rate/%	RSD/ %	Moisturizing rate/%	RSD/ %	Moisturizing rate/%	RSD/ %
Babassu oil 1565	100.45	0.1	100.43	0.1	100.43	0.1	100.42	0.1
Commercially available water-soluble babassu oil	100.39	0.1	100.38	0.1	100.37	0.1	100.36	0.1
Shea butter oil 1565	101.38	0.3	101.36	0.3	101.35	0.3	101.35	0.3
Commercially available water-soluble shea butter oil	99.61	0.4	99.59	0.4	99.57	0.4	99.55	0.4
Babassu 1560	99.42	0.4	99.26	0.7	99.44	0.6	99.46	0.5
Babassu 1570	100.10	0.6	100.43	1.8	100.29	0.7	99.58	0.4
Shea butter 1570	100.48	1.5	100.23	0.9	100.16	1.8	98.47	1.7