Which emollients are effective and acceptable for eczema in children?

Parent satisfaction with lotion, cream, gel and ointment emollient types: secondary analysis of the Best Emollients for Eczema study

BACKGROUND

The main determinant of emollient effectiveness is whether it is used, which in turn is linked with user satisfaction.

OBJECTIVES

To compare parental satisfaction with emollient type for the treatment of childhood eczema.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data from the Best Emollients for Eczema (BEE) trial was undertaken. In total, 550 children aged between 6 months and 12 years were recruited from primary care in England and randomized to use a lotion, cream, gel or ointment as their main emollient for 16 weeks. At week, 16 parents were asked to complete an Emollient Satisfaction Questionnaire (ESQ). Completion rates and scores were compared, using χ2 test, t-test calculations and one-way Anova as appropriate.

RESULTS

Data on 378 participants (68.7% of those randomized) were analysed. Mean ESQ scores were gel 20.9 (SD 5.3), lotion 20.4 (SD 5.6), cream 18.8 (SD 6.3) and ointment 15.2 (SD 6.8) (P < 0.001). In pairwise comparisons, there was a statistically significant difference in mean ESQ scores between ointment and lotion (P < 0.001), ointment and cream (P < 0.001) and ointment and gel (P < 0.001) but not between lotion, cream and gel. Participants using lotions had highest overall satisfaction and were most likely to continue using their emollient. ESQ scores were correlated with reported emollient use and improvements in parent-reported eczema severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, lotions and gels were favoured over creams and ointments. Although satisfaction is determined by personal preference, these results will aid parents, clinicians and children to find the right emollient(s) for them.

Atopic dermatitis (eczema) guidelines: 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters GRADE- and Institute of Medicine-based recommendations

BACKGROUND

Guidance addressing atopic dermatitis (AD) management, last issued in 2012 by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force, requires updating as a result of new treatments and improved guideline and evidence synthesis methodology.

OBJECTIVE

To produce evidence-based guidelines that support patients, clinicians, and other decision-makers in the optimal treatment of AD.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary guideline panel consisting of patients and caregivers, AD experts (dermatology and allergy/immunology), primary care practitioners (family medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine), and allied health professionals (psychology, pharmacy, nursing) convened, prioritized equity, diversity, and inclusiveness, and implemented management strategies to minimize influence of conflicts of interest. The Evidence in Allergy Group supported guideline development by performing systematic evidence reviews, facilitating guideline processes, and holding focus groups with patient and family partners. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. Evidence-to-decision frameworks, subjected to public comment, translated evidence to recommendations using trustworthy guideline principles.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 25 recommendations to gain and maintain control of AD for patients with mild, moderate, and severe AD. The eAppendix provides practical information and implementation considerations in 1-2 page patient-friendly handouts.

CONCLUSION

These evidence-based recommendations address optimal use of (1) topical treatments (barrier moisturization devices, corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, PDE4 inhibitors [crisaborole], topical JAK inhibitors, occlusive [wet wrap] therapy, adjunctive antimicrobials, application frequency, maintenance therapy), (2) dilute bleach baths, (3) dietary avoidance/elimination, (4) allergen immunotherapy, and (5) systemic treatments (biologics/monoclonal antibodies, small molecule immunosuppressants [cyclosporine, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate, JAK inhibitors], and systemic corticosteroids) and UV phototherapy (light therapy).

Microwave-Assisted Enzymatic Esterification Production of Emollient Esters

Currently, esterification production of isopropyl myristate (IPM) or isopropyl palmitate (IPP) uses a homogeneous or heterogeneous acid substance as a catalyst and is conducted at high temperatures and pressures. Utilization of this type of catalyst requires an additional postproduction process (neutralization and purification), which burdens the production cost. Microwave enzymatic esterification is a simple and fast method. The results showed that reaction time, ratio molar of fatty acids to isopropyl alcohol, catalyst weight, and microwave power have a significant effect on the IPM or IPP conversion. Further, the energy consumption of this process is less than other enzymatic esterification and is certainly more energy efficient, which could save 99 and 29% of processing time.

Comparison of lotions, creams, gels and ointments for the treatment of childhood eczema: the BEE RCT

Background

Emollients are recommended for children with eczema (atopic eczema/dermatitis). A lack of head-to-head comparisons of the effectiveness and acceptability of the different types of emollients has resulted in a 'trial and error' approach to prescribing.

Objective

To compare the effectiveness and acceptability of four commonly used types of emollients for the treatment of childhood eczema.

Design

Four group, parallel, individually randomised, superiority randomised clinical trials with a nested qualitative study, completed in 2021. A purposeful sample of parents/children was interviewed at ≈ 4 and ≈ 16 weeks.

Setting

Primary care (78 general practitioner surgeries) in England.

Participants

Children aged between 6 months and 12 years with eczema, of at least mild severity, and with no known sensitivity to the study emollients or their constituents.

Interventions

Study emollients sharing the same characteristics in the four types of lotion, cream, gel or ointment, alongside usual care, and allocated using a web-based randomisation system. Participants were unmasked and the researcher assessing the Eczema Area Severity Index scores was masked.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure scores over 16 weeks. The secondary outcomes were Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure scores over 52 weeks, Eczema Area Severity Index score at 16 weeks, quality of life (Atopic Dermatitis Quality of Life, Child Health Utility-9 Dimensions and EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, scores), Dermatitis Family Impact and satisfaction levels at 16 weeks.

Results

A total of 550 children were randomised to receive lotion (analysed for primary outcome 131/allocated 137), cream (137/140), gel (130/135) or ointment (126/138). At baseline, 86.0% of participants were white and 46.4% were female. The median (interquartile range) age was 4 (2-8) years and the median Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure score was 9.3 (SD 5.5). There was no evidence of a difference in mean Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure scores over the first 16 weeks between emollient types (global p = 0.765): adjusted Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure pairwise differences - cream-lotion 0.42 (95% confidence interval -0.48 to 1.32), gel-lotion 0.17 (95% confidence interval -0.75 to 1.09), ointment-lotion -0.01 (95% confidence interval -0.93 to 0.91), gel-cream -0.25 (95% confidence interval -1.15 to 0.65), ointment-cream -0.43 (95% confidence interval -1.34 to 0.48) and ointment-gel -0.18 (95% confidence interval -1.11 to 0.75). There was no effect modification by parent expectation, age, disease severity or the application of UK diagnostic criteria, and no differences between groups in any of the secondary outcomes. Median weekly use of allocated emollient, non-allocated emollient and topical corticosteroids was similar across groups. Overall satisfaction was highest for lotions and gels. There was no difference in the number of adverse reactions and there were no significant adverse events. In the nested qualitative study (n = 44 parents, n = 25 children), opinions about the acceptability of creams and ointments varied most, yet problems with all types were reported. Effectiveness may be favoured over acceptability. Parents preferred pumps and bottles over tubs and reported improved knowledge about, and use of, emollients as a result of taking part in the trial.

Limitations

Parents and clinicians were unmasked to allocation. The findings may not apply to non-study emollients of the same type or to children from more ethnically diverse backgrounds.

Conclusions

The four emollient types were equally effective. Satisfaction with the same emollient types varies, with different parents/children favouring different ones. Users need to be able to choose from a range of emollient types to find one that suits them.

Future work

Future work could focus on how best to support shared decision-making of different emollient types and evaluations of other paraffin-based, non-paraffin and 'novel' emollients.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN84540529 and EudraCT 2017-000688-34.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (HTA 15/130/07) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 19. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A novel moisture for xerosis in psoriatic patients: a single center study

BACKGROUND

Xerosis is an extremely common condition, especially in the elderly population. It is the most common cause of pruritus in the older adult. Since xerosis is generally caused by a lack of epidermal lipids, the use of leave-on skin care products is the mainstay treatment. The aim of this open prospective analytical observational study was to investigate the clinical and self-reported hydrating efficacy of a moisturizer formulation containing a synergy between amino-inositol and urea (INOSIT-U 20) in patients with psoriasis and xerosis.

METHODS

Twenty-two patients with psoriasis successfully treated with biologic therapy, and who presented xerosis, were recruited. Each patient was instructed to apply the topical with a frequency of two applications per die on the identified skin area. Corneometry values and a VAS itch questionnaire were measured at baseline (T0) and after 28 days (T4). To evaluate the cosmetic efficacy, the volunteers also completed a self-assessment questionnaire.

RESULTS

Comparing Corneometry values at T0 and T4, a statistically significant increase value was observed in the area subjected to topical treatment (P<0.0001). A significant decrease in itch (P=0.001) was also observed. Moreover, the patients' ratings of the cosmetic properties of the moisturizer showed significant confirmation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides preliminary evidence that INOSIT-U20 provides a good hydrating effect on xerosis, further reducing self-reported itch.

Fifteen-minute consultation: How to manage eczema in children

Atopic eczema is common and has a major impact on quality of life. Paediatricians and general practitioners play a key role in the non-specialist treatment of atopic eczema. However, the clinical nature of the diagnosis, multitude of topical therapies and sometimes complicated treatment strategies can leave both clinicians and families feeling bewildered. This article aims to provide a concise, patient-focused summary of the assessment and management of childhood atopic eczema.

Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema

Background

Emollients are used as maintenance therapy for all severities of eczema but there is a lack of head‐to‐head comparisons of effectiveness and acceptability.

Aim

To determine the validity of a self‐report questionnaire designed to assess user satisfaction with a given emollient and to report the findings.

Methods

Data were analysed from the Choice of Moisturiser for Eczema Treatment trial, which compared four emollient types (Aveeno^® lotion, Diprobase^® cream, Doublebase^® gel and Hydromol^® ointment) in children aged < 5 years with clinically diagnosed eczema. An emollient satisfaction questionnaire was completed after 12 weeks. Responses for individual items were scored from 0 to 4. Total scores ranged from 0 to 28 (low to high satisfaction). Completion rates and distributions of responses for individual items and total scores, categorized by emollient type, were assessed, and two hypotheses were tested to determine the questionnaire's construct validity.

Results

Data from 77.2% (152 of 197) of participants were analysed. One item was rejected because of a high rate (44.7%) of ‘don't know’ responses, leaving seven items with high completion rates (98.7%) and weak evidence of floor or ceiling effects. A positive association was observed between total score and overall emollient satisfaction (Spearman correlation 0.78; P < 0.001). Total scores were highest (mean ± SD 23.5 ± 3.9) in the lotion group and lowest (18.4 ± 4.6) in the ointment group.

Conclusion

The emollient satisfaction questionnaire appears to have good validity. Further work is required to validate the questionnaire in other settings and to assess its reliability.

Depth-dependent hydration dynamics in human skin: Vehicle-controlled efficacy assessment of a functional 10% urea plus NMF moisturizer by near-infrared confocal spectroscopic imaging (KOSIM IR) and capacitance method complemented by volunteer perception

BACKGROUND

Stratum corneum (SC) hydration is vital for the optimal maintenance and appearance of healthy skin. In this context, we evaluated the efficacy of an NMF-enriched moisturizer containing 10% urea on different aspects of SC hydration of dry skin.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In two clinical studies, the hydration efficacy of the moisturizer in comparison to its vehicle was investigated. In the first study, 42 subjects applied the moisturizer and the vehicle to one lower leg each. Thirty minutes and 24 h after this single treatment, SC hydration was measured by corneometry. Volunteers also rated skin moisturization and evaluated product properties. In the second study, 27 subjects each treated one forearm twice daily for 2 weeks with the moisturizer and the vehicle. Then, depth-resolved water-absorption spectra were measured by near-infrared confocal spectroscopic imaging (KOSIM IR).

RESULTS

The moisturizer exerted a superior hydrating effect compared to the vehicle. KOSIM IR measurements show that, compared to the vehicle, the moisturizer significantly improved the water gradient in the SC from the surface to a depth of 15 μm. Moreover, the moisturizer received high acceptance ratings from the volunteers and was preferred to the vehicle.

CONCLUSION

The humectants applied in the investigated moisturizer improved SC water content in total and as a function of depth. The combination of depth-resolved data (KOSIM IR) with classical corneometry provides an integrated concept in the measurement of skin hydration, rendering both methods complementary. These findings were in line with the volunteers` self-assessments of the moisturizer properties that are relevant to treatment adherence.

What's new in atopic eczema? An analysis of systematic reviews published in 2019. Part 2: treatment

This review forms part of a series of annual evidence updates on atopic eczema (AE), and provides a summary of key findings from systematic reviews (SRs) published or indexed in 2019 related to AE treatment. Several SRs assessed the efficacy of topical corticosteroids (TCS), topical calcineurin inhibitors, topical phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors and topical Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK/STAT) pathway inhibitors. However, there is a lack of good-quality trials comparing topical treatment agents with TCS, which remain the standard of care for patients with AE. Most of the included trials lack meaningful comparisons as they used vehicle as a comparator. There is also lack of harmonization of outcome measures for AE across studies. Large, well-designed RCTs are needed to further determine whether any specific emollients offer superior benefit. There is evidence highlighting limited benefit of oral H1 antihistamines as 'add-on' therapy to topical treatment of eczema. Mycophenolate mofetil may have a role in patients with refractory AE. Among biologic therapies, most of the efficacy data relate to dupilumab. Furthermore, there is growing evidence for the efficacy and safety of systemic JAK/STAT pathway inhibitors, but the existing data are of low quality.

Efficacy of Nonprescription Moisturizers for Atopic Dermatitis: An Updated Review of Clinical Evidence

Twice-daily moisturization is recommended by international guidelines as the bedrock of the management of atopic dermatitis (AD). Moisturizers should be selected based on proven clinical effectiveness in improving the skin barrier and improving the symptoms of AD. We searched the PubMed database for clinical trials assessing daily moisturization for the treatment of AD published between 2006 and 2019. Studies had to assess the efficacy of commercially available moisturizers using objective measures of corneometry, transepidermal water loss, or incidence of flare as endpoints, and treatments had to be currently available to patients. Clinical studies showed that moisturization (typically twice daily) significantly improved the skin barrier in adults and children with AD. Longer-term flare studies showed that daily moisturization reduced the incidence of flares and extended the time between flares. Proactive moisturization of infants at high risk of developing AD may reduce its manifestation. Therapeutic moisturizers for AD are specifically formulated with ingredients that target symptoms of AD, such as itch, inflammation, or compromised skin barrier. The US FDA requires that any moisturizer available in the USA and claiming to treat AD must contain colloidal oatmeal. Healthcare providers can maximize compliance and outcomes by educating patients on the benefits of liberally applying a therapeutic moisturizer twice daily to support the skin barrier and help reduce the incidence of flares. Specific recommendations should be for clinically tested moisturizers evaluated using objective, validated skin assessments.

Daily emollient during infancy for prevention of eczema: the BEEP randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Skin barrier dysfunction precedes eczema development. We tested whether daily use of emollient in the first year could prevent eczema in high-risk children.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial in 12 hospitals and four primary care sites across the UK. Families were approached via antenatal or postnatal services for recruitment of term infants (at least 37 weeks' gestation) at high risk of developing eczema (ie, at least one first-degree relative with parent-reported eczema, allergic rhinitis, or asthma, diagnosed by a doctor). Term newborns with a family history of atopic disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to application of emollient daily (either Diprobase cream or DoubleBase gel) for the first year plus standard skin-care advice (emollient group) or standard skin-care advice only (control group). The randomisation schedule was created using computer-generated code (stratified by recruiting centre and number of first-degree relatives with atopic disease) and participants were assigned to groups using an internet-based randomisation system. The primary outcome was eczema at age 2 years (defined by UK working party criteria) with analysis as randomised regardless of adherence to allocation for participants with outcome data collected, and adjusting for stratification variables. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN21528841. Data collection for long-term follow-up is ongoing, but the trial is closed to recruitment.

FINDINGS

1394 newborns were randomly assigned to study groups between Nov 19, 2014, and Nov 18, 2016; 693 were assigned to the emollient group and 701 to the control group. Adherence in the emollient group was 88% (466 of 532) at 3 months, 82% (427 of 519) at 6 months, and 74% (375 of 506) at 12 months in those with complete questionnaire data. At age 2 years, eczema was present in 139 (23%) of 598 infants with outcome data collected in the emollient group and 150 (25%) of 612 infants in the control group (adjusted relative risk 0·95 [95% CI 0·78 to 1·16], p=0·61; adjusted risk difference -1·2% [-5·9 to 3·6]). Other eczema definitions supported the results of the primary analysis. Mean number of skin infections per child in year 1 was 0·23 (SD 0·68) in the emollient group versus 0·15 (0·46) in the control group; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1·55 (95% CI 1·15 to 2·09).

INTERPRETATION

We found no evidence that daily emollient during the first year of life prevents eczema in high-risk children and some evidence to suggest an increased risk of skin infections. Our study shows that families with eczema, asthma, or allergic rhinitis should not use daily emollients to try and prevent eczema in their newborn.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.