Can early skin care normalise dry skin and possibly prevent atopic eczema? A pilot study in young infants

Disease modification in inflammatory skin disorders: opportunities and challenges

Progress in understanding of the mechanisms underlying chronic inflammatory skin disorders, such as atopic dermatitis and psoriasis vulgaris, has led to new treatment options with the primary goal of alleviating symptoms. In addition, this knowledge has the potential to inform on new strategies aimed at inducing deep and therapy-free remission, that is, disease modification, potentially impacting on associated comorbidities. However, to reach this goal, key areas require further exploration, including the definitions of disease modification and disease activity index, further understanding of disease mechanisms and systemic spillover effects, potential windows of opportunity, biomarkers for patient stratification and successful intervention, as well as appropriate study design. This Perspective article assesses the opportunities and challenges in the discovery and development of disease-modifying therapies for chronic inflammatory skin disorders.

Atopic dermatitis across the life course

Atopic dermatitis, the most common chronic inflammatory skin disease, can occur at any age, and patterns of disease activity vary over time. Both prevalence and incidence are highest in infancy and early childhood, followed by a second peak in older adulthood. Birth cohort studies from European countries following children through adolescence have identified subgroups of patients with early-onset persistent disease, early-onset resolving disease, and later-onset disease. Parental history of atopy and genetic factors are among the most consistent predictors of more persistent disease. Studies have begun to examine whether molecular markers differ by age group, although longitudinal data are lacking. Breastfeeding, probiotics and skin-directed therapies such as emollients have been investigated as potential preventive measures, but randomized trials have not found consistent long-term benefit. Future research should focus on patterns of disease activity beyond early adulthood and the role of treatments on long-term disease activity.

Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy

BACKGROUND

Eczema and food allergy are common health conditions that usually begin in early childhood and often occur in the same people. They can be associated with an impaired skin barrier in early infancy. It is unclear whether trying to prevent or reverse an impaired skin barrier soon after birth is effective for preventing eczema or food allergy.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To assess the effects of skin care interventions such as emollients for primary prevention of eczema and food allergy in infants. Secondary objective To identify features of study populations such as age, hereditary risk, and adherence to interventions that are associated with the greatest treatment benefit or harm for both eczema and food allergy.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed an updated search of the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in September 2021. We searched two trials registers in July 2021. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews, and scanned conference proceedings to identify further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs of skin care interventions that could potentially enhance skin barrier function, reduce dryness, or reduce subclinical inflammation in healthy term (> 37 weeks) infants (≤ 12 months) without pre-existing eczema, food allergy, or other skin condition. Eligible comparisons were standard care in the locality or no treatment. Types of skin care interventions could include moisturisers/emollients; bathing products; advice regarding reducing soap exposure and bathing frequency; and use of water softeners. No minimum follow-up was required.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and primary analyses used the IPD dataset. Primary outcomes were cumulative incidence of eczema and cumulative incidence of immunoglobulin (Ig)E-mediated food allergy by one to three years, both measured at the closest available time point to two years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during the intervention period; eczema severity (clinician-assessed); parent report of eczema severity; time to onset of eczema; parent report of immediate food allergy; and allergic sensitisation to food or inhalant allergen.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 33 RCTs comprising 25,827 participants. Of these, 17 studies randomising 5823 participants reported information on one or more outcomes specified in this review.  We included 11 studies, randomising 5217 participants, in one or more meta-analyses (range 2 to 9 studies per individual meta-analysis), with 10 of these studies providing IPD; the remaining 6 studies were included in the narrative results only.   Most studies were conducted at children's hospitals. Twenty-five studies, including all those contributing data to meta-analyses, randomised newborns up to age three weeks to receive a skin care intervention or standard infant skin care. Eight of the 11 studies contributing to meta-analyses recruited infants at high risk of developing eczema or food allergy, although the definition of high risk varied between studies. Durations of intervention and follow-up ranged from 24 hours to three years. All interventions were compared against no skin care intervention or local standard care. Of the 17 studies that reported information on our prespecified outcomes, 13 assessed emollients. We assessed most of the evidence in the review as low certainty and had some concerns about risk of bias. A rating of some concerns was most often due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors or significant missing data, which could have impacted outcome measurement but was judged unlikely to have done so. We assessed the evidence for the primary food allergy outcome as high risk of bias due to the inclusion of only one trial, where findings varied based on different assumptions about missing data. Skin care interventions during infancy probably do not change the risk of eczema by one to three years of age (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.31; risk difference 5 more cases per 1000 infants, 95% CI 28 less to 47 more; moderate-certainty evidence; 3075 participants, 7 trials) or time to onset of eczema (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence; 3349 participants, 9 trials). Skin care interventions during infancy may increase the risk of IgE-mediated food allergy by one to three years of age (RR 2.53, 95% CI 0.99 to 6.49; low-certainty evidence; 976 participants, 1 trial) but may not change risk of allergic sensitisation to a food allergen by age one to three years (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.71; low-certainty evidence; 1794 participants, 3 trials). Skin care interventions during infancy may slightly increase risk of parent report of immediate reaction to a common food allergen at two years (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.61; low-certainty evidence; 1171 participants, 1 trial); however, this was only seen for cow's milk, and may be unreliable due to over-reporting of milk allergy in infants. Skin care interventions during infancy probably increase risk of skin infection over the intervention period (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.75; risk difference 17 more cases per 1000 infants, 95% CI one more to 38 more; moderate-certainty evidence; 2728 participants, 6 trials) and may increase the risk of infant slippage over the intervention period (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.99; low-certainty evidence; 2538 participants, 4 trials) and stinging/allergic reactions to moisturisers (RR 2.24, 95% 0.67 to 7.43; low-certainty evidence; 343 participants, 4 trials), although CIs for slippages and stinging/allergic reactions were wide and include the possibility of no effect or reduced risk. Preplanned subgroup analyses showed that the effects of interventions were not influenced by age, duration of intervention, hereditary risk, filaggrin (FLG) mutation, chromosome 11 intergenic variant rs2212434, or classification of intervention type for risk of developing eczema. We could not evaluate these effects on risk of food allergy. Evidence was insufficient to show whether adherence to interventions influenced the relationship between skin care interventions and eczema or food allergy development.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low- to moderate-certainty evidence, skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema; may increase risk of food allergy; and probably increase risk of skin infection. Further study is needed to understand whether different approaches to infant skin care might prevent eczema or food allergy.

Expert consensus on ceramides containing skincare in newborns and infants and potential mitigation of atopic dermatitis

INTRODUCTION

The vulnerable skin of neonates and infants is still developing anatomically and functionally and more susceptible to skin barrier disruption. The current consensus paper explores challenges in caring for neonates and infants' skin, skincare use and evaluates the role of ceramides (CERs) containing cleansers and moisturizers.

EVIDENCE AQUISITION

A panel of eight clinicians who treat neonates and infants developed a consensus paper on new-born and infant skin barrier integrity and CERs-containing skincare importance. The consensus process consisted of a modified Delphi technique. The selected information from the literature searches, coupled with the panel's opinion and experience, was used to adopt statements to provide clinical data for paediatric dermatologists, dermatologists, and paediatric healthcare providers who treat neonates and infants.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Increasingly, evidence supports skincare starting early in life, recognizing the benefits of ongoing daily use of non-alkaline cleansers and moisturizers to maintain skin barrier function. Skincare for neonates and infants should be safe, effective, and fragrance as well as sensitizing agent-free. Skincare with CERs may benefit the stratum corneum's lipid and water content.

CONCLUSIONS

When applied from birth onwards, gentle cleansers and moisturizers containing barrier lipids help maintain the protective skin barrier and soothe the skin with long-term moisturizing benefits.

English version of guidelines for the management of asteatosis 2021 in Japan

This is the English version of guidelines for the management of asteatosis 2021 in Japan. Asteatosis is a synonym of xerosis found in a wide range of diseases that induce dry skin through impaired functions of either water retention of the stratum corneum or skin covering with acid mantle. Patients with asteatosis may be accompanied by pruritus. Moisturizers are the first-line treatment for asteatosis and their adequate use must be recommended. The main purpose of the present guidelines is to define skin symptoms requiring treatment with moisturizers for medical use in patients with asteatosis. If the deterioration of marked scaling or scratch marks is predicted, therapeutic intervention with moisturizers for medical use should be considered even in the absence of pruritus. Regarding six important points requiring decision-making in clinical practice (clinical questions), we evaluated the balance between the benefits and harm of medical interventions in reference to previous reports of clinical research, and presented the recommendation grades and evidence levels to optimize the patient outcome by medical interventions.

Barrier defect in atopic dermatitis - possibilities and limits of basic skin therapy

The increased permeability of the skin barrier towards environmental factors such as allergens is considered a key factor in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD). Strengthening the skin barrier through basic skin therapy represents the basis of any therapy for AD. It is well known that genetic factors as well as the skin inflammation itself contribute to the weakening of the barrier; here, recent studies have led to a deeper understanding of the complex structures of the epidermis. The possibility of counteracting the disease preventively by the use of basic skin therapy from birth on has been studied intensively in recent years. This article summarizes recent findings on the effects of basic skin therapy as a primary and secondary preventive measure.

Food Allergy Prevention: More Than Peanut

Given an apparent increase in food allergies worldwide, the focus on prevention strategies has intensified. Following the Learning Early About Peanut study, there is now a widespread acceptance that peanut should be introduced promptly into the diet of high-risk infants. However, most food allergies are caused by triggers other than peanut and additional prevention strategies are being evaluated. The appreciation of the role of an impaired skin barrier in the process of food sensitization and subsequent allergy has led to a spectrum of dermatologically orientated studies. Other prevention strategies address the role of the microbiome, dietary components, and other modifiable risk factors. With regard to early introduction of foods other than peanut, studies are heterogeneous in design and governmental and professional society response to the early introduction trials has varied, ranging from new guidelines confining advice specifically to peanut, to ones recommending prompt introduction of a broad spectrum of allergenic foods. Much remains to be determined with regard to the acceptability and uptake of the new guidelines and their impact on infant feeding behavior and food allergy outcomes. This review discusses the panoply of prevention approaches, their promise, and limitations.

Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy

BACKGROUND

Eczema and food allergy are common health conditions that usually begin in early childhood and often occur together in the same people. They can be associated with an impaired skin barrier in early infancy. It is unclear whether trying to prevent or reverse an impaired skin barrier soon after birth is effective in preventing eczema or food allergy.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To assess effects of skin care interventions, such as emollients, for primary prevention of eczema and food allergy in infants Secondary objective To identify features of study populations such as age, hereditary risk, and adherence to interventions that are associated with the greatest treatment benefit or harm for both eczema and food allergy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to July 2020: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers and checked reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We contacted field experts to identify planned trials and to seek information about unpublished or incomplete trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of skin care interventions that could potentially enhance skin barrier function, reduce dryness, or reduce subclinical inflammation in healthy term (> 37 weeks) infants (0 to 12 months) without pre-existing diagnosis of eczema, food allergy, or other skin condition were included. Comparison was standard care in the locality or no treatment. Types of skin care interventions included moisturisers/emollients; bathing products; advice regarding reducing soap exposure and bathing frequency; and use of water softeners. No minimum follow-up was required.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and primary analyses used the IPD dataset. Primary outcomes were cumulative incidence of eczema and cumulative incidence of immunoglobulin (Ig)E-mediated food allergy by one to three years, both measured by the closest available time point to two years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during the intervention period; eczema severity (clinician-assessed); parent report of eczema severity; time to onset of eczema; parent report of immediate food allergy; and allergic sensitisation to food or inhalant allergen.

MAIN RESULTS

This review identified 33 RCTs, comprising 25,827 participants. A total of 17 studies, randomising 5823 participants, reported information on one or more outcomes specified in this review. Eleven studies randomising 5217 participants, with 10 of these studies providing IPD, were included in one or more meta-analysis (range 2 to 9 studies per individual meta-analysis). Most studies were conducted at children's hospitals. All interventions were compared against no skin care intervention or local standard care. Of the 17 studies that reported our outcomes, 13 assessed emollients. Twenty-five studies, including all those contributing data to meta-analyses, randomised newborns up to age three weeks to receive a skin care intervention or standard infant skin care. Eight of the 11 studies contributing to meta-analyses recruited infants at high risk of developing eczema or food allergy, although definition of high risk varied between studies. Durations of intervention and follow-up ranged from 24 hours to two years. We assessed most of this review's evidence as low certainty or had some concerns of risk of bias. A rating of some concerns was most often due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors or significant missing data, which could have impacted outcome measurement but was judged unlikely to have done so. Evidence for the primary food allergy outcome was rated as high risk of bias due to inclusion of only one trial where findings varied when different assumptions were made about missing data. Skin care interventions during infancy probably do not change risk of eczema by one to two years of age (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.31; moderate-certainty evidence; 3075 participants, 7 trials) nor time to onset of eczema (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence; 3349 participants, 9 trials). It is unclear whether skin care interventions during infancy change risk of IgE-mediated food allergy by one to two years of age (RR 2.53, 95% CI 0.99 to 6.47; 996 participants, 1 trial) or allergic sensitisation to a food allergen at age one to two years (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.69; 1055 participants, 2 trials) due to very low-certainty evidence for these outcomes. Skin care interventions during infancy may slightly increase risk of parent report of immediate reaction to a common food allergen at two years (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.61; low-certainty evidence; 1171 participants, 1 trial). However, this was only seen for cow's milk, and may be unreliable due to significant over-reporting of cow's milk allergy in infants. Skin care interventions during infancy probably increase risk of skin infection over the intervention period (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.77; moderate-certainty evidence; 2728 participants, 6 trials) and may increase risk of infant slippage over the intervention period (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.99; low-certainty evidence; 2538 participants, 4 trials) or stinging/allergic reactions to moisturisers (RR 2.24, 95% 0.67 to 7.43; low-certainty evidence; 343 participants, 4 trials), although confidence intervals for slippages and stinging/allergic reactions are wide and include the possibility of no effect or reduced risk. Preplanned subgroup analyses show that effects of interventions were not influenced by age, duration of intervention, hereditary risk, FLG mutation,  or classification of intervention type for risk of developing eczema. We could not evaluate these effects on risk of food allergy. Evidence was insufficient to show whether adherence to interventions influenced the relationship between skin care interventions and risk of developing eczema or food allergy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema, and probably increase risk of skin infection. Effects of skin care interventions on risk of food allergy are uncertain. Further work is needed to understand whether different approaches to infant skin care might promote or prevent eczema and to evaluate effects on food allergy based on robust outcome assessments.

Food allergy: an updated review on pathogenesis, diagnosis, prevention and management

Food allergy (FA) is an adverse immunologic response triggered by normally innocuous food protein antigens.  FA can be broadly classified into those that are IgE mediated, those that are mediated by both IgE-dependent and IgE-independent pathways (mixed), and those that are not IgE mediated  Immunoglobulin E. (IgE)-mediated reaction is characterized by rapid onset of symptoms involving respiratory, gastrointestinal, dermatologic and cardiovascular systems; mixed and non-IgE-mediated has a longer onset and manifests primary in the gastrointestinal tract and skin. The diagnosis of food allergy is based on clinical history, diagnostic testing (skin prick test and allergen-specific IgE levels in the serum), elimination diet and, oral food challenge. In recent years the diagnosis and treatment of pediatric FA have notably improved. In the diagnostic pathway of FA an important recent innovation is the CRD introduction.  This resulted in the possibility of improving diagnostic accuracy through FA prediction severity and prognosis and thereby decreasing the OCF necessity. Recent studies emphasize the possibility of preventing FA through early introduction of food (peanuts and egg) to high-risk infants. FA management is based on avoidance of offending food and prompt treatment of allergic reaction. Currently under study are recently developed treatment approaches for FA management including specific OIT.

Skin emollient and early complementary feeding to prevent infant atopic dermatitis (PreventADALL): a factorial, multicentre, cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Skin emollients applied during early infancy could prevent atopic dermatitis, and early complementary food introduction might reduce food allergy in high-risk infants. The study aimed to determine if either regular skin emollients applied from 2 weeks of age, or early complementary feeding introduced between 12 and 16 weeks of age, reduced development of atopic dermatitis by age 12 months in the general infant population.

METHODS

This population-based 2×2 factorial, randomised clinical trial was done at Oslo University Hospital and Østfold Hospital Trust, Oslo, Norway; and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. Infants of women recruited antenatally at the routine ultrasound pregnancy screening at 18 weeks were cluster-randomised at birth from 2015 to 2017 to the following groups: (1) controls with no specific advice on skin care while advised to follow national guidelines on infant nutrition (no intervention group); (2) skin emollients (bath additives and facial cream; skin intervention group); (3) early complementary feeding of peanut, cow's milk, wheat, and egg (food intervention group); or (4) combined skin and food interventions (combined intervention group). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) using computer- generated cluster randomisation based on 92 geographical living area blocks as well as eight 3-month time blocks. Carers were instructed to apply the interventions on at least 4 days per week. Atopic dermatitis by age 12 months was the primary outcome, based on clinical investigations at 3, 6 and 12 months by investigators masked to group allocation. Atopic dermatitis was assessed after completing the 12-month investigations and diagnosed if either of the UK Working Party and Hanifin and Rajka (12 months only) diagnostic criteria were fulfilled. The primary efficacy analyses was done by intention-to-treat analysis on all randomly assigned participants. Food allergy results will be reported once all investigations at age 3 years are completed in 2020. This was a study performed within ORAACLE (the Oslo Research Group of Asthma and Allergy in Childhood; the Lung and Environment). The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02449850.

FINDINGS

2697 women were recruited between Dec 9, 2014, and Oct 31, 2016, from whom 2397 newborn infants were enrolled from April 14, 2015, to April 11, 2017. Atopic dermatitis was observed in 48 (8%) of 596 infants in the no intervention group, 64 (11%) of 575 in the skin intervention group, 58 (9%) of 642 in the food intervention group, and 31 (5%) of 583 in the combined intervention group. Neither skin emollients nor early complementary feeding reduced development of atopic dermatitis, with a risk difference of 3·1% (95% CI -0·3 to 6·5) for skin intervention and 1·0% (-2·1 to 4·1) for food intervention, in favour of control. No safety concerns with the interventions were identified. Reported skin symptoms and signs (including itching, oedema, exanthema, dry skin, and urticaria) were no more frequent in the skin, food, and combined intervention groups than in the no intervention group.

INTERPRETATION

Neither early skin emollients nor early complementary feeding reduced development of atopic dermatitis by age 12 months. Our study does not support the use of these interventions to prevent atopic dermatitis by 12 months of age in infants.

FUNDING

The study was funded by several public and private funding bodies: The Regional Health Board South East, The Norwegian Research Council, Health and Rehabilitation Norway, The Foundation for Healthcare and Allergy Research in Sweden-Vårdalstiftelsen, Swedish Asthma and Allergy Association's Research Foundation, Swedish Research Council-the Initiative for Clinical Therapy Research, The Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation, SFO-V at the Karolinska Institute, Freemason Child House Foundation in Stockholm, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare-FORTE, Oslo University Hospital, the University of Oslo, and Østfold Hospital Trust.

Predicting Skin Barrier Dysfunction and Atopic Dermatitis in Early Infancy

BACKGROUND

Dry skin is associated with increased transepidermal water loss (TEWL), which has been found to precede atopic dermatitis (AD) in childhood.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify parental, prenatal, and perinatal predictive factors of dry skin, high TEWL, and AD at 3 months of age, and to determine if dry skin or high TEWL at 3 months can predict AD at 6 months.

METHODS

From the Preventing Atopic Dermatitis and Allergies in children prospective birth cohort study, we included 1150 mother-child pairs. Dry skin, TEWL, and eczema were assessed at 3- and 6-month investigations. Eczema, used as a proxy for AD, was defined as the presence of eczematous lesions, excluding differential diagnoses to AD. High TEWL was defined as TEWL >90th percentile, equaling 11.3 g/m²/h. Potential predictive factors were recorded from electronic questionnaires at 18- and 34-week pregnancy and obstetric charts.

RESULTS

Significant predictive factors (P < .05) for dry skin at 3 months were delivery >38 gestational weeks and paternal age >37 years; for high TEWL, male sex, birth during winter season, and maternal allergic disease; and for eczema, elective caesarean section, multiparity, and maternal allergic diseases. Dry skin without eczema at 3 months was predictive for eczema at 6 months (adjusted odds ratio: 1.92, 95% confidence interval: 1.21-3.05; P = .005), whereas high TEWL at 3 months was not.

CONCLUSION

In early infancy, distinct parental- and pregnancy-related factors were predictive for dry skin, high TEWL, and AD. Dry skin at 3 months of age was predictive for AD 3 months later.

Basic skin care in atopic dermatitis - new and established treatment options

Basic skin care (basic therapy) is a mainstay in the treatment of atopic dermatitis, irrespective of disease severity and current disease activity. Consistent application of basic skin care plays a key role in restoring skin barrier function and reducing xerosis as well as pruritus. Moreover, it has been shown that concurrent basic therapy has steroid-sparing effects in acute disease flares. In long-term atopic dermatitis management, the use of basic skin care is associated with prolonged recurrence-free intervals. Recent studies have also demonstrated that early initiation of basic skin therapy has protective effects in infants at risk of developing atopic dermatitis. The present review addresses these topics with a focus on established treatments and new developments.

Skin care for healthy babies at term: A systematic review of the evidence

OBJECTIVES

to identify what skin practices are important for the protection of baby skin in healthy term babies (0-6 months) and generate evidence-based conclusions to inform health professionals and parents.

DESIGN

eleven databases were searched for all empirical quantitative and qualitative research published between 2000-2015 which explored baby skin care for bathing and cleansing, nappy care, hair and scalp care, management of dry skin or baby massage, for healthy term babies up to 6 months old. Papers not published in English were excluded. A total of 3062 papers were identified. Pairs of reviewers assessed all citations and extracted data independently. There were 26 included papers: 16 RCTs, 3 non-randomised experimental studies, 1 mixed-methods study and 6 qualitative studies. Primary and secondary outcome measures were analysed using meta-analysis or narrative descriptive statistics. Synthesis of qualitative data was not possible due to disparity of the evidence.

FINDINGS

from the small numbers of studies with comparable data, there was no evidence of any significant differences between tested wash products and water or tested baby wipes and water. There was some evidence to suggest that daily use of full-body emollient therapy may help to reduce the risk of atopic eczema in high risk babies with a genetic predisposition to eczema; however, the use of olive oil or sunflower oil for baby dry skin may adversely affect skin barrier function. There was no evidence about hair/scalp care or baby massage. Qualitative research indicates that parents and health professionals believe that water alone is best.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

meta-analysis was restricted due to the lack of consistency of study outcome measures. Although there is considerable RCT evidence comparing the use of specific products against water alone, or another product, for bathing, cleansing and nappy care, the power of this evidence is reduced due to inconsistency of outcome measures in terms of outcome, treatment site or time-point. The development of a core outcome measure set is advocated for trials assessing skin care practices.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

this review offers health professionals best evidence available on which to base their advice. Of those studies with comparative outcomes, the evidence indicates no difference between the specific products tested and water alone; offering parents a choice in their baby skin care regimen. Protocol available: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPEROFILES/28054_PROTOCOL_20151009.pdf.

Emollients and moisturisers for eczema

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a chronic skin disease characterised by dry skin, intense itching, inflammatory skin lesions, and a considerable impact on quality of life. Moisturisation is an integral part of treatment, but it is unclear if moisturisers are effective.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of moisturisers for eczema.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to December 2015: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, the GREAT database. We searched five trials registers and checked references of included and excluded studies for further relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in people with eczema.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 77 studies (6603 participants, mean age: 18.6 years, mean duration: 6.7 weeks). We assessed 36 studies as at a high risk of bias, 34 at unclear risk, and seven at low risk. Twenty-four studies assessed our primary outcome 'participant-assessed disease severity', 13 assessed 'satisfaction', and 41 assessed 'adverse events'. Secondary outcomes included investigator-assessed disease severity (addressed in 65 studies), skin barrier function (29), flare prevention (16), quality of life (10), and corticosteroid use (eight). Adverse events reporting was limited (smarting, stinging, pruritus, erythema, folliculitis).Six studies evaluated moisturiser versus no moisturiser. 'Participant-assessed disease severity' and 'satisfaction' were not assessed. Moisturiser use yielded lower SCORAD than no moisturiser (three studies, 276 participants, mean difference (MD) -2.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.55 to -0.28), but the minimal important difference (MID) (8.7) was unmet. There were fewer flares with moisturisers (two studies, 87 participants, RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.70), time to flare was prolonged (median: 180 versus 30 days), and less topical corticosteroids were needed (two studies, 222 participants, MD -9.30 g, 95% CI -15.3 to -3.27). There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events (one study, 173 participants, risk ratio (RR) 15.34, 95% CI 0.90 to 261.64). Evidence for these outcomes was low quality.With Atopiclair (three studies), 174/232 participants experienced improvement in participant-assessed disease severity versus 27/158 allocated to vehicle (RR 4.51, 95% CI 2.19 to 9.29). Atopiclair decreased itching (four studies, 396 participants, MD -2.65, 95% CI -4.21 to -1.09) and achieved more frequent satisfaction (two studies, 248 participants, RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.89), fewer flares (three studies, 397 participants, RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.31), and lower EASI (four studies, 426 participants, MD -4.0, 95% CI -5.42 to -2.57), but MID (6.6) was unmet. The number of participants reporting adverse events was not statistically different (four studies, 430 participants, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.33). Evidence for these outcomes was moderate quality.Participants reported skin improvement more frequently with urea-containing cream than placebo (one study, 129 participants, RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.53; low-quality evidence), with equal satisfaction between the two groups (one study, 38 participants, low-quality evidence). Urea-containing cream improved dryness (investigator-assessed) more frequently (one study, 128 participants, RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.71; moderate-quality evidence) with fewer flares (one study, 44 participants, RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.92; low-quality evidence), but more participants in this group reported adverse events (one study, 129 participants, RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.34; moderate-quality evidence).Three studies assessed glycerol-containing moisturiser versus vehicle or placebo. More participants in the glycerol group noticed skin improvement (one study, 134 participants, RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.48; moderate-quality evidence), and this group saw improved investigator-assessed SCORAD (one study, 249 participants, MD -2.20, 95% CI -3.44 to -0.96; high-quality evidence), but MID was unmet. Participant satisfaction was not addressed. The number of participants reporting adverse events was not statistically significant (two studies, 385 participants, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.19; moderate-quality evidence).Four studies investigated oat-containing moisturisers versus no treatment or vehicle. No significant differences between groups were reported for participant-assessed disease severity (one study, 50 participants, RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.46; low-quality evidence), satisfaction (one study, 50 participants, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.52; very low-quality evidence), and investigator-assessed disease severity (three studies, 272 participants, standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.23, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.21; low-quality evidence). In the oat group, there were fewer flares (one study, 43 participants, RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.7; low-quality evidence) and less topical corticosteroids needed (two studies, 222 participants, MD -9.30g, 95% CI 15.3 to -3.27; low-quality evidence), but more adverse events were reported (one study, 173 participants; Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.26, 95% CI 1.76 to 29.92; low-quality evidence).All moisturisers above were compared to placebo, vehicle, or no moisturiser. Participants considered moisturisers more effective in reducing eczema (five studies, 572 participants, RR 2.46, 95% CI 1.16 to 5.23; low-quality evidence) and itch (seven studies, 749 participants, SMD -1.10, 95% CI -1.83 to -0.38) than control. Participants in both treatment arms reported comparable satisfaction (three studies, 296 participants, RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.26; low-quality evidence). Moisturisers led to lower investigator-assessed disease severity (12 studies, 1281 participants, SMD -1.04, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.51; high-quality evidence) and fewer flares (six studies, 607 participants, RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.62; moderate-quality evidence), but there was no difference in adverse events (10 studies, 1275 participants, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; moderate-quality evidence).Topical active treatment combined with moisturiser was more effective than active treatment alone in reducing investigator-assessed disease severity (three studies, 192 participants, SMD -0.87, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.57; moderate-quality evidence) and flares (one study, 105 participants, RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.93), and was preferred by participants (both low-quality evidence). There was no statistically significant difference in number of adverse events (one study, 125 participants, RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.19; very low-quality evidence). Participant-assessed disease severity was not addressed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most moisturisers showed some beneficial effects, producing better results when used with active treatment, prolonging time to flare, and reducing the number of flares and amount of topical corticosteroids needed to achieve similar reductions in eczema severity. We did not find reliable evidence that one moisturiser is better than another.

Bathing and Associated Treatments in Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common complaints presenting to dermatologists, and patients typically inquire as to appropriate bathing recommendations. Although many dermatologists, allergists, and primary-care practitioners provide explicit bathing instructions, recommendations regarding frequency of bathing, duration of bathing, and timing related to emollient and medication application relative to bathing vary widely. Conflicting and vague guidelines stem from knowledge related to the disparate effects of water on skin, as well as a dearth of studies, especially randomized controlled trials, evaluating the effects of water and bathing on the skin of patients with atopic dermatitis. We critically review the literature related to bathing and associated atopic dermatitis treatments, such as wet wraps, bleach baths, bath additives, and balneotherapy. We aim to provide readers with a comprehensive understanding of the impact of water and related therapies on atopic dermatitis as well as recommendations based upon the published data.

Consensus Conference on Clinical Management of pediatric Atopic Dermatitis

The Italian Consensus Conference on clinical management of atopic dermatitis in children reflects the best and most recent scientific evidence, with the aim to provide specialists with a useful tool for managing this common, but complex clinical condition. Thanks to the contribution of experts in the field and members of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology (SIAIP) and the Italian Society of Pediatric Dermatology (SIDerP), this Consensus statement integrates the basic principles of the most recent guidelines for the management of atopic dermatitis to facilitate a practical approach to the disease. The therapeutical approach should be adapted to the clinical severity and requires a tailored strategy to ensure good compliance by children and their parents. In this Consensus, levels and models of intervention are also enriched by the Italian experience to facilitate a practical approach to the disease.

Assessment of Egg Yolk Oil Extraction Methods of for ShiZhenKang Oil by Pharmacodynamic Index Evaluation

To assess the extraction methods of egg yolk oil in ShiZhenKang (SZK) oil, which is used to treat eczema, a mice model of eczema was established by using 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB). The therapeutic effects of egg yolk oil extracted by different methods from SZK oil on the model of acute eczema in mice were evaluated. The oil yield rate of ethanol extraction is 42.06%. Its egg yolk oil is orange and has a rich, sweet, egg smell. Moreover, the SZK oil prepared from it has a very good therapeutic effect on the model of acute eczema in mice. The alcohol extraction method is the preferable method according to a comprehensive evaluation of each index of seven kinds of methods to extract the egg yolk oil.

[Atopic dermatitis in children. New aspects]

Atopic dermatitis in childhood is controlled by adaequate topical treatment in the majority of cases. Severe manifestations, recurrent superinfections, associated food allergy and psychosocial aspects of a chronic disease in childhood need special consideration. Furthermore, prevention is an important issue in this age group. The following article focuses on new aspects with repercussions on the management of childhood atopic dermatitis and possible implications for the future.