首页> 外文期刊>Journal of drugs in dermatology: JDD >An over-the-counter moisturizer is as clinically effective as, and more cost-effective than, prescription barrier creams in the treatment of children with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis: a randomized, controlled trial.
【24h】

An over-the-counter moisturizer is as clinically effective as, and more cost-effective than, prescription barrier creams in the treatment of children with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis: a randomized, controlled trial.

机译:在治疗轻度至中度特应性皮炎的儿童中,非处方保湿剂在临床上与处方屏障乳膏一样有效,并且更具成本效益:一项随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a prevalent skin disorder with significant cost of treatment. Several prescription device moisturizers have been approved by the FDA to treat AD but are significantly more expensive than well-crafted over-the-counter (OTC) moisturizers. No studies have been performed to compare both the clinical efficacy and cost-efficacy of these prescription devices to OTC moisturizers. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy and cost-efficacy of a glycyrrhetinic acid-containing barrier repair cream (BRC-Gly, Atopiclair(R)), a ceramide-dominant barrier repair cream (BRC-Cer, EpiCeram(R)) and an OTC petroleum-based skin protectant moisturizer (OTC-Pet, Aquaphor Healing Ointment(R)) as monotherapy for mild-to-moderate AD in children. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients, age 2-17 years, with mild-to-moderate AD were randomized 1:1:1 to receive one of three treatments-BRC-Gly, BRC-Cer or OTC-Pet-with instructions to apply the treatment three times daily for three weeks. Disease severity and improvement was assessed at baseline and on days 7 and 21. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference for any efficacy assessment was found between the three groups at each time point. The OTC-Pet was found to be at least 47 times more cost-effective than BRC-Gly or BRC-Cer. LIMITATIONS: The relatively small sample size of 39 subjects was not sufficient to establish OTC-Pet as superior treatment in AD. CONCLUSIONS: OTC-Pet is as effective in treating mild-to-moderate AD as both BRC-Gly and BRC-Cer and is at least 47 times more cost-effective. NAME OF REGISTRY: II-AF-ATD-Aquaphor, Comparing the Efficacy and Cost-Effectiveness of Aquaphor to Atopiclair and EpiCeram in Children with Mild to Moderate Atopic Dermatitis. REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER: NCT01093469.
机译:背景:特应性皮炎(AD)是一种流行的皮肤疾病,治疗费用昂贵。 FDA已经批准了几种处方设备保湿剂来治疗AD,但比精心设计的非处方(OTC)保湿剂贵得多。尚未进行研究来比较这些处方设备与OTC保湿剂的临床功效和成本效益。目的:本研究的目的是比较一种含有甘草次酸的屏障修复霜(BRC-Gly,Atopiclair®),一种以神经酰胺为主的屏障修复霜(BRC-Cer,EpiCeram)的临床疗效和成本效益。 (R))和OTC石油基皮肤保护保湿剂(OTC-Pet,Aquaphor Healing软膏)作为儿童轻度至中度AD的单一疗法。方法:将29例2-17岁,轻度至中度AD患者随机分配为1:1:1,以接受三种治疗方法之一-BRC-Gly,BRC-Cer或OTC-Pet-,并附有使用说明每天3次,共3周。在基线以及第7天和第21天评估了疾病的严重程度和改善情况。结果:在每个时间点,三组之间的任何功效评估均未发现统计学上的显着差异。发现OTC-Pet的成本效益是BRC-Gly或BRC-Cer的至少47倍。局限性:39名受试者相对较小的样本量不足以将OTC-Pet确立为AD的优良治疗方法。结论:OTC-Pet与BRC-Gly和BRC-Cer一样有效地治疗轻度至中度AD,且成本效益至少高47倍。登记名称:II-AF-ATD-Aquaphor,比较在患有中度特应性皮炎的儿童中,Aquaphor对特应性和EpiCeram的疗效和成本效果。注册标识符:NCT01093469。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号