| Literature DB >> 31118960 |
Yan Li1, Wei Xu1, Linfeng Li1, Ruina Zhang1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Qingpeng ointment on eczema-associated pruritus. TRIAL DESIGN ANDEntities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31118960 PMCID: PMC6500642 DOI: 10.1155/2019/4961691
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Pruritus symptom description and score.
| Pruritus characteristics | Symptom description | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Severity | No itchy | 0 |
| Occasionally itchy, no adverse effects on daily life | 1 | |
| Paroxysmal itchy with various intensity, adversely affecting sleep | 2 | |
| Intensive itchy, adversely affecting sleep and work seriously | 3 | |
|
| ||
| Frequency | Not itchy | 0 |
| Occasionally itchy, 1-2 episodes daily | 1 | |
| moderate itchy, 3-5 episodes daily | 2 | |
| Frequent itchy, > 5 episodes daily | 3 | |
|
| ||
| Duration | Not itchy | 0 |
| Last for less than 30 minutes | 1 | |
| Last for 30–60 minutes | 2 | |
| Last for more than one hour | 3 | |
|
| ||
| Lesion morphology | No lesion | 0 |
| Dry skin and desquamation | 1 | |
| Skin scratch and scar | 2 | |
| Skin hypertrophy and lichenification | 3 | |
Total Score= pruritus severity score + pruritus frequency score + pruritus duration score + lesion morphology score.
Figure 1Patient flow diagram.
Baseline data.
| Qingpeng Ointment Group | Sham Ointment Group | |
|---|---|---|
|
| 15/15 | 17/13 |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Range, Min - Max | 26 - 72 | 20 - 74 |
| Mean ± SD | 49.73 ± 13.82 | 50.36 ± 13.32 |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Range, Min - Max | 8-68 | 6-62 |
| Mean ± SD | 29.70±15.17 | 32.17±16.97 |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Range, Min - Max | 1.8 – 14.1 | 2.1 - 13.5 |
| Mean ± SD | 7.63 ±3.28 | 7.52±3.28 |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Range, Min - Max | 4-10 | 5-10 |
| Mean ± SD | 7.23 ±1.41 | 7.17±1.39 |
VAS scores for pruritus before and after treatment.
| Qingpeng Ointment | Sham Ointment | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | 7.23 ±1.41 | 7.17±1.39 | 0.854 |
| 0 min after the first treatment | 5.07±1.82 | 5.47±1.55 | 0.363 |
| 5 min after the first treatment | 4.97±1.79 | 5.03±1.54 | 0.878 |
| 10 min after the first treatment | 4.03±1.43 | 4.97±1.52 | 0.017 |
| 30 min after the first treatment | 2.97±1.19 | 5.10±1.65 | <0.0001 |
| One-week follow-up visit | 3.33±1.02 | 7.07±1.48 | <0.0001 |
| Two-week follow-up visit | 2.07±1.05 | 5.93±1.11 | <0.0001 |
Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare VAS scores at different time points. Multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare the two groups.
Pruritus symptom and lesion morphology scores before and after treatment.
| Qingpeng Ointment | Sham Ointment | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Week 0 | 2.07±0.87 | 1.90±0.80 | 0.443 |
| Week 1 | 1.33±0.48 | 1.87±0.78 | 0.002 |
| Week 2 | 0.93±0.45 | 1.63±0.61 | < 0.001 |
|
| |||
| Week 0 | 2.63±0.61 | 2.57±0.68 | 0.692 |
| Week 1 | 1.73±0.74 | 2.47±0.68 | < 0.001 |
| Week 2 | 1.10±0.66 | 2.30±0.70 | < 0.001 |
|
| |||
| Week 0 | 2.37±0.76 | 2.30±0.75 | 0.734 |
| Week 1 | 1.63±0.56 | 2.27±0.74 | < 0.001 |
| Week 2 | 0.87±0.35 | 2.13±0.68 | < 0.001 |
|
| |||
| Week 0 | 1.77±0.73 | 1.63±0.85 | 0.517 |
| Week 1 | 1.33±0.71 | 1.53±0.86 | 0.330 |
| Week 2 | 0.80±0.55 | 1.33±0.96 | 0.011 |
|
| |||
| Week 0 | 8.83±2.31 | 8.40±2.61 | 0.498 |
| Week 1 | 6.03±1.45 | 8.13±2.43 | < 0.001 |
| Week 2 | 3.70±1.68 | 7.40±2.21 | < 0.001 |
Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare the scores of pruritus severity, frequency, duration, lesion morphology, and total score at different time points. Multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare the two groups.
Figure 2The scores of pruritus severity (a), frequency (b), duration (c), lesion morphology (d), and total score (e) changes.
Figure 3EASI and VAS score changes.
EASI and effective rate.
| Qingpeng Ointment | Sham Ointment | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Week 0 | 7.63 ±3.28 | 7.52±3.28 | 0.894 |
| Week 1 | 4.90±3.04 | 5.92±3.20 | 0.209 |
| Week 2 | 2.27±1.81 | 4.96±3.39 | <0.0001 |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Week 1 | |||
| Complete cure | 3 | 0 | |
| Significant improvement | 10 | 5 | |
| Moderate improvement | 5 | 12 | |
| No improvement | 12 | 13 | |
| Effective rate (%) | 43.33 (13/30) | 16.67 (5/30) | |
|
| |||
| Week 2 | |||
| Complete cure | 8 | 3 | |
| Significant improvement | 15 | 8 | |
| Moderate improvement | 4 | 9 | |
| No improvement | 3 | 10 | |
| Effective rate (%) | 76.67 (23/30) | 36.67 (11/30) | |
Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare EASI at different time points. Multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare the two groups.