4.6 Article

Comparative trial of moisturizer containing licochalcone A vs. hydrocortisone lotion in the treatment of childhood atopic dermatitis: a pilot study

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2010.03845.x

Keywords

atopic dermatitis; childhood; hydrocortisone; licochalcone A

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Although moisturizer usage has been considered a mainstay of treatment for atopic dermatitis (AD) patients, few clinical studies have been investigated. Recently, moisturizers containing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, such as licochalcone A (LA) and vitamin B-12 are of emerging interest. Objective To compare the effectiveness of moisturizer containing LA with hydrocortisone (HC) lotion in treatment of childhood AD. Methods The randomized, controlled, investigator-blinded 6-week study was conducted. Patients were administered with twice-daily application of LA lotion on one side of the body and HC lotion on the opposite side. The clinical outcome was assessed by the scoring of atopic dermatitis (SCORAD) index. The relapse rate was comparatively analysed by survival analysis. Results From 30 patients enrolled, 26 patients completed the protocol. The mean age of the children was 5.8 years. The average baseline SCORAD score is about 28 on both sides. The response rates of both agents were equal to 73.33%. There is no statistical significant group difference in reduction of SCORAD score. Although we observed more rapid resolution of oedema and erythema in areas treated with HC lotion, both agents exhibited no significant difference. The relapse rate of HC group was higher than in LA group; however, there was no significant difference. No side-effect was observed from both agents. Conclusion The effectiveness of LA lotion is equal to that of HC lotion. It was suggested that moisturizer containing LA could be used both for treatment of acute and maintenance phase in mild-to-moderate childhood AD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available