32 research outputs found

    Best emollients for eczema (BEE) – comparing four types of emollients in children with eczema: protocol for randomised trial and nested qualitative study

    Get PDF
    Introduction Atopic dermatitis/eczema affects around 20% of children and is characterised by inflamed, dry, itchy skin. Guidelines recommend ‘leave-on’ emollients that are applied directly to the skin to add or trap moisture and used regularly, they can soothe, enhance the skin barrier and may prevent disease ‘flares’. However, the suitability of the many different emollients varies between people and there is little evidence to help prescribers and parents and carers decide which type to try first.Methods and analysis Design: pragmatic, multicentre, individually randomised, parallel group superiority trial of four types of emollient (lotions, creams, gel or ointments).Setting: general practitioner surgeries in England.Participants: children aged over 6 months and less than 12 years with mild-to-severe eczema and no known sensitivity to study emollients.Interventions: study-approved lotion, cream, gel or ointment as the only leave-on emollient for 16 weeks, with directions to apply twice daily and as required. Other treatments, such as topical corticosteroids, used as standard care.Follow-up: 52 weeks.Primary outcome: validated patient-orientated eczema measure measured weekly for 16 weeks.Secondary outcomes: eczema signs (Eczema Area Severity Index) by masked researcher, treatment use, parent satisfaction, adverse events, child and family quality of life (Atopic Dermatitis Quality of Life, Child Health Utility 9D and Dermatitis Family Impact).Sample size: 520 participants (130 per group).Analysis: intention-to-treat using linear mixed models for repeated measures.Nested qualitative study: audio-recording of sample of baseline appointments and up to 60 interviews with participants at 4 and 16 weeks, interviews to be transcribed and analysed thematically.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval granted by the NHS REC (South West - Central Bristol Research Ethics Committee 17/SW/0089). Findings will be presented at conferences, published in open-access peer-reviewed journals and the study website; and summaries shared with key stakeholders

    Effectiveness and safety of lotion, cream, gel, and ointment emollients for childhood eczema: a pragmatic, randomised, phase 4, superiority trial

    Get PDF
    Background: To our knowledge, there are no trials comparing emollients commonly used for childhood eczema. We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and safety of the four main emollient types: lotions, creams, gels, and ointments. Methods: We did a pragmatic, individually randomised, parallel group, phase 4 superiority trial in 77 general practice surgeries in England. Children aged between 6 months and 12 years with eczema (Patient Orientated Eczema Measure [POEM] score >2) were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1; stratified by centre and minimised by baseline POEM score and age, using a web-based system) to lotions, creams, gels, or ointments. Clinicians and parents were unmasked. The initial emollient prescription was for 500 g or 500 mL, to be applied twice daily and as required. Subsequent prescriptions were determined by the family. The primary outcome was parent-reported eczema severity over 16 weeks (weekly POEM), with analysis as randomly assigned regardless of adherence, adjusting for baseline and stratification variables. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned participants. This trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN84540529. Findings: Between Jan 19, 2018, and Oct 31, 2019, 12 417 children were assessed for eligibility, 550 of whom were randomly assigned to a treatment group (137 to lotion, 140 to cream, 135 to gel, and 138 to ointment). The numbers of participants who contributed at least two POEM scores and were included in the primary analysis were 131 in the lotion group, 137 in the cream group, 130 in the gel group, and 126 in the ointment group. Baseline median age was 4 years (IQR 2–8); 255 (46%) participants were girls, 295 (54%) were boys; 473 (86%) participants were White; and the mean POEM score was 9·3 (SD 5·5). There was no difference in eczema severity between emollient types over 16 weeks (global p value=0·77), with adjusted POEM pairwise differences of: cream versus lotion 0·42 (95% CI −0·48 to 1·32), gel versus lotion 0·17 (−0·75 to 1·09), ointment versus lotion −0·01 (−0·93 to 0·91), gel versus cream −0·25 (−1·15 to 0·65), ointment versus cream −0·43 (−1·34 to 0·48), and ointment versus gel −0·18 (−1·11 to 0·75). This result remained unchanged following multiple imputation, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses. The total number of adverse events did not significantly differ between the treatment groups (lotions 49 [36%], creams 54 [39%], gels 54 [40%], and ointments 48 [35%]; p=0·79), although stinging was less common with ointments (12 [9%] of 138 participants) than lotions (28 [20%] of 137), creams (24 [17%] of 140), or gels (25 [19%] of 135). Interpretation: We found no difference in effectiveness between the four main types of emollients for childhood eczema. Users need to be able to choose from a range of emollients to find one that they are more likely to use effectively. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research

    Outcome of acute liver failure in the elderly

    No full text
    Older age is considered a poor prognostic factor in acute liver failure (ALF) and may still be considered a relative contraindication for liver transplantation for ALF. We aimed to evaluate the impact of older age, defined as age ≥ 60 years, on outcomes in patients with ALF. One thousand one hundred twenty-six consecutive prospective patients from the US Acute Liver Failure Study Group registry were studied. The median age was 38 years (range, 15–81 years). One thousand sixteen patients (90.2%) were younger than 60 years (group 1), and 499 (49.1%) of these had acetaminophen-induced ALF; this rate of acetaminophen-induced ALF was significantly higher than that in patients ≥ 60 years (group 2; n = 110; 23.6% with acetaminophen-induced ALF, P < 0.001). The overall survival rate was 72.7% in group 1 and 60.0% in group 2 (not significant) for acetaminophen patients and 67.9% in group 1 and 48.2% in group 2 for non-acetaminophen patients (P < 0.001). The spontaneous survival rate (ie, survival without liver transplantation) was 64.9% in group 1 and 60.0% in group 2 (not significant) for acetaminophen patients and 30.8% in group 1 and 24.7% in group 2 for non-acetaminophen patients (P = 0.27). Age was not a significant predictor of spontaneous survival in multiple logistic regression analyses. Group 2 patients were listed for liver transplantation significantly less than group 1 patients. Age was listed as a contraindication for transplantation in 5 patients. In conclusion, in contrast to previous studies, we have demonstrated a relatively good spontaneous survival rate for older patients with ALF when it is corrected for etiology. However, overall survival was better for younger non-acetaminophen patients. Fewer older patients were listed for transplantation
    corecore