| Literature DB >> 36107506 |
Yuan-Cui Meng1, Jin-Chao Fan2, Wei-Ni Bian1.
Abstract
This retrospective study investigated the effectiveness of calamine lotion (CL) as an adjunctive therapy to mometasone furoate ointment (MFO) in the treatment of infant eczema (IE). This retrospective study analyzed the electronic medical records of 50 IE infants. They were allocated to a treatment group or a control group, with 25 subjects in each group. All infants in both groups received MFO. In addition, infants in the treatment group underwent CL. The outcomes were effectiveness based on the eczema area and severity index, lesion area, and pruritus severity. We analyzed the outcomes before and after treatment. The results of this study showed that infants in the treatment group had more effective in effectiveness based on eczema area and severity index (P < .01), lesion area (P < .01), and pruritus severity (P = .01) than those in the control group. However, no medical records reported any adverse events in either group. The results of this study showed that CL added to MFO was more effective than MFO alone in the treatment of infants with IE.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36107506 PMCID: PMC9439764 DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030237
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) ISSN: 0025-7974 Impact factor: 1.817
Figure 1.Flow chart of eligible infants enrolled in this study. CL = calamine lotion, MFO = mometasone furoate ointment.
General characteristics of included infants.
| Characteristics | Treatment group (n = 25) | Controlgroup (n = 25) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (mo) | 12.2 (4.1) | 11.9 (4.4) | .80 |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 13 (52.0) | 11 (44.0) | .57 |
| Female | 12 (48.0) | 14 (56.0) | – |
| Race (ethnicity) | |||
| Han | 23 (92.0) | 22 (88.0) | .64 |
| Hui | 2 (8.0) | 3 (12.0) | – |
| Duration of eczema (d) | 7.4 (3.3) | 7.1 (3.5) | .76 |
Data are present as mean ± standard deviation or number (%).
Effectiveness was assessed based on EASI.
| Groups | Cure | Marked effect | Effective | Ineffective |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment group (n = 25) | 6 (24.0) | 7 (28.0) | 8 (32.0) | 4 (16.0) | <.01 |
| Control group (n = 25) | 14 (56.0) | 11 (44.0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
Data are present as number (%).
EASI = eczema area and severity index.
Comparison of lesion area between the 2 groups.
| Lesion area (cm) | Treatment (n = 25) | Control group (n = 25) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | 3.8 (2.3) | 3.6 (2.6) | .77 |
| Aftertreatment | 0.4 (0.5) | 1.2 (1.4) | <.01 |
| Change from treatment before | −3.4 (−4.3 to −2.0) | −2.4 (−3.3 to −1.5) | |
| Difference between 2 groups | −1.0 (−1.3 to −0.7) | <.01 |
Data are present as mean ± standard deviation (range).
Comparison of pruritus severity between the 2 groups.
| Lesion area (cm) | Treatment (n = 25) | Control group (n = 25) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | 2.0 (0.6) | 2.2 (0.7) | .28 |
| Aftertreatment | 0.3 (0.5) | 0.9 (1.1) | .01 |
| Change from treatment before | −1.7 (−2.4 to −1.1) | −1.3 (−3.3 to −1.1) | |
| Difference between 2 groups | −0.4 (−0.6 to −0.2) | .01 |
Data are present as mean ± standard deviation (range).