Cargando…

Emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: A double-blind, randomised comparison of two UK-marketed products

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the moisturising efficacy and acceptability of physical characteristics of two commonly prescribed emollients licenced in the UK, Doublebase Dayleve gel (DELP) and Diprobase cream (DIPC). Methods: The study was a double-blind, concurrent bi-lateral com...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Djokic-Gallagher, Jasmina, Rosher, Philip, Walker, Jennine, Sykes, Krystyna, Hart, Valerie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5020331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26864095
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09546634.2015.1136384
_version_ 1782453187470426112
author Djokic-Gallagher, Jasmina
Rosher, Philip
Walker, Jennine
Sykes, Krystyna
Hart, Valerie
author_facet Djokic-Gallagher, Jasmina
Rosher, Philip
Walker, Jennine
Sykes, Krystyna
Hart, Valerie
author_sort Djokic-Gallagher, Jasmina
collection PubMed
description Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the moisturising efficacy and acceptability of physical characteristics of two commonly prescribed emollients licenced in the UK, Doublebase Dayleve gel (DELP) and Diprobase cream (DIPC). Methods: The study was a double-blind, concurrent bi-lateral comparison in female eczema subjects with dry skin. Results: In Part 1, comparing the area under the curve (AUC) change from baseline corneometer readings over 24 h following single applications of the emollients to the volar forearms of 34 subjects, the AUC for DELP was more than three times that seen for DIPC (p < 0.0001). In Part 2, comparing the same outcome measured over 5 days of twice daily applications to the lower legs in 36 subjects, the AUC for DELP was approximately five times that for DIPC (p < 0.0001). 69% of subjects “Like Slightly” or “Like Strongly” DELP compared to 33% for DIPC (p = 0.025). 72% indicated they would use DELP again compared to 33% for DIPC (p = 0.033). 75% of subjects preferred DELP, 17% preferred DIPC and 8% expressed no preference (p = 0.0004).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5020331
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50203312016-09-29 Emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: A double-blind, randomised comparison of two UK-marketed products Djokic-Gallagher, Jasmina Rosher, Philip Walker, Jennine Sykes, Krystyna Hart, Valerie J Dermatolog Treat Eczema Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the moisturising efficacy and acceptability of physical characteristics of two commonly prescribed emollients licenced in the UK, Doublebase Dayleve gel (DELP) and Diprobase cream (DIPC). Methods: The study was a double-blind, concurrent bi-lateral comparison in female eczema subjects with dry skin. Results: In Part 1, comparing the area under the curve (AUC) change from baseline corneometer readings over 24 h following single applications of the emollients to the volar forearms of 34 subjects, the AUC for DELP was more than three times that seen for DIPC (p < 0.0001). In Part 2, comparing the same outcome measured over 5 days of twice daily applications to the lower legs in 36 subjects, the AUC for DELP was approximately five times that for DIPC (p < 0.0001). 69% of subjects “Like Slightly” or “Like Strongly” DELP compared to 33% for DIPC (p = 0.025). 72% indicated they would use DELP again compared to 33% for DIPC (p = 0.033). 75% of subjects preferred DELP, 17% preferred DIPC and 8% expressed no preference (p = 0.0004). Taylor & Francis 2016-09-02 2016-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5020331/ /pubmed/26864095 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09546634.2015.1136384 Text en © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
spellingShingle Eczema
Djokic-Gallagher, Jasmina
Rosher, Philip
Walker, Jennine
Sykes, Krystyna
Hart, Valerie
Emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: A double-blind, randomised comparison of two UK-marketed products
title Emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: A double-blind, randomised comparison of two UK-marketed products
title_full Emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: A double-blind, randomised comparison of two UK-marketed products
title_fullStr Emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: A double-blind, randomised comparison of two UK-marketed products
title_full_unstemmed Emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: A double-blind, randomised comparison of two UK-marketed products
title_short Emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: A double-blind, randomised comparison of two UK-marketed products
title_sort emollient efficacy and acceptability in the treatment of eczematous dry skin: a double-blind, randomised comparison of two uk-marketed products
topic Eczema
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5020331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26864095
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09546634.2015.1136384
work_keys_str_mv AT djokicgallagherjasmina emollientefficacyandacceptabilityinthetreatmentofeczematousdryskinadoubleblindrandomisedcomparisonoftwoukmarketedproducts
AT rosherphilip emollientefficacyandacceptabilityinthetreatmentofeczematousdryskinadoubleblindrandomisedcomparisonoftwoukmarketedproducts
AT walkerjennine emollientefficacyandacceptabilityinthetreatmentofeczematousdryskinadoubleblindrandomisedcomparisonoftwoukmarketedproducts
AT sykeskrystyna emollientefficacyandacceptabilityinthetreatmentofeczematousdryskinadoubleblindrandomisedcomparisonoftwoukmarketedproducts
AT hartvalerie emollientefficacyandacceptabilityinthetreatmentofeczematousdryskinadoubleblindrandomisedcomparisonoftwoukmarketedproducts