BACKGROUND: Eczema is a common condition, yet there are uncertainties regarding many frequently used treatments. Knowing which of these uncertainties matter to patients and clinicians is important, because they are likely to have different priorities from those of researchers and funders. OBJECTIVES: To identify the uncertainties in eczema treatment that are important to patients who have eczema, their carers and the healthcare professionals (HCPs) who treat them. METHODS: An eczema Priority Setting Partnership was established, including patients, HCPs and researchers. Eczema treatment uncertainties were gathered from patients and clinicians, and then prioritized in a transparent process, using a methodology advocated by the James Lind Alliance. RESULTS: In the consultation stage 493 participants (including 341 patients/carers) made 1070 submissions, of which 718 were uncertainties relating to the treatment of eczema. Treatment uncertainties with more than one submission were grouped into 52 'indicative uncertainties', which were then ranked by 514 participants (including 399 patients/carers). The top 14 treatment uncertainties were prioritized for research. The first four were common to patients/carers and HCPs (shared uncertainties): (i) the best and safest way of using topical steroids (including frequency of application, potency, length of time, alternation with other topical treatments and age limits); (ii) the long-term safety of topical steroids; (iii) the role of food allergy tests; and (iv) the most effective and safe emollients in treating eczema. The remaining 10 of the top 14 uncertainties comprised the next five highest ranked uncertainties for patients and the next five highest ranked uncertainties for HCPs. At a workshop involving 40 participants (patients, HCPs and researchers), shared uncertainties were formulated into possible research questions. CONCLUSIONS: The top 14 treatment uncertainties around the treatment of eczema provide guidance for researchers and funding bodies to ensure that future research answers questions that are important to both clinicians and patients.
BACKGROUND:Eczema is a common condition, yet there are uncertainties regarding many frequently used treatments. Knowing which of these uncertainties matter to patients and clinicians is important, because they are likely to have different priorities from those of researchers and funders. OBJECTIVES: To identify the uncertainties in eczema treatment that are important to patients who have eczema, their carers and the healthcare professionals (HCPs) who treat them. METHODS: An eczema Priority Setting Partnership was established, including patients, HCPs and researchers. Eczema treatment uncertainties were gathered from patients and clinicians, and then prioritized in a transparent process, using a methodology advocated by the James Lind Alliance. RESULTS: In the consultation stage 493 participants (including 341 patients/carers) made 1070 submissions, of which 718 were uncertainties relating to the treatment of eczema. Treatment uncertainties with more than one submission were grouped into 52 'indicative uncertainties', which were then ranked by 514 participants (including 399 patients/carers). The top 14 treatment uncertainties were prioritized for research. The first four were common to patients/carers and HCPs (shared uncertainties): (i) the best and safest way of using topical steroids (including frequency of application, potency, length of time, alternation with other topical treatments and age limits); (ii) the long-term safety of topical steroids; (iii) the role of food allergy tests; and (iv) the most effective and safe emollients in treating eczema. The remaining 10 of the top 14 uncertainties comprised the next five highest ranked uncertainties for patients and the next five highest ranked uncertainties for HCPs. At a workshop involving 40 participants (patients, HCPs and researchers), shared uncertainties were formulated into possible research questions. CONCLUSIONS: The top 14 treatment uncertainties around the treatment of eczema provide guidance for researchers and funding bodies to ensure that future research answers questions that are important to both clinicians and patients.
Authors: Braden Manns; Brenda Hemmelgarn; Erin Lillie; Sally Crowe P G Dip; Annette Cyr; Michael Gladish; Claire Large; Howard Silverman; Brenda Toth; Wim Wolfs; Andreas Laupacis Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Stephanie J Lax; Jane Harvey; Emma Axon; Laura Howells; Miriam Santer; Matthew J Ridd; Sandra Lawton; Sinéad Langan; Amanda Roberts; Amina Ahmed; Ingrid Muller; Long Chiau Ming; Saumya Panda; Pavel Chernyshov; Ben Carter; Hywel C Williams; Kim S Thomas; Joanne R Chalmers Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-03-11
Authors: Matthew J Ridd; Niamh M Redmond; Sandra Hollinghurst; Nicola Ball; Lindsay Shaw; Richard Guy; Victoria Wilson; Chris Metcalfe; Sarah Purdy Journal: Trials Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Min Jun; Braden Manns; Andreas Laupacis; Liam Manns; Bhavdeep Rehal; Sally Crowe; Brenda R Hemmelgarn Journal: Can J Kidney Health Dis Date: 2015-10-01
Authors: Paul J Turner; Elizabeth Andoh-Kesson; Sarah Baker; Alexa Baracaia; Alisha Barfield; Julie Barnett; Karen Brunas; Chun-Han Chan; Stella Cochrane; Katherine Cowan; Mary Feeney; Simon Flanagan; Adam T Fox; Leigh George; M Hazel Gowland; Christina Heeley; Ian Kimber; Rebecca Knibb; Kirsty Langford; Alan Mackie; Tim McLachlan; Lynne Regent; Matthew Ridd; Graham Roberts; Adrian Rogers; Guy Scadding; Sarah Stoneham; Darryl Thomson; Heidi Urwin; Carina Venter; Michael Walker; Rachel Ward; Ross A R Yarham; Maggie Young; John O'Brien Journal: Clin Exp Allergy Date: 2021-07-23 Impact factor: 5.401
Authors: Emma Axon; Joanne R Chalmers; Miriam Santer; Matthew J Ridd; Sandra Lawton; Sinead M Langan; Douglas J C Grindlay; Ingrid Muller; Amanda Roberts; Amina Ahmed; Hywel C Williams; Kim S Thomas Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 2.692