RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The long-term efficacy of corticosteroids to prevent atopic dermatitis (AD) relapses has partially been addressed in children. This study compared an intermittent dosing regimen of fluticasone propionate (FP) cream 0.05% with its vehicle base in reducing the risk of relapse in children with stabilized AD. METHODS: A randomized controlled, multicentric, double-blind trial was conducted. Children (2-10 years) with mild/moderate AD (exclusion criteria: >30% affected body surface area and/or head) were enrolled into an Open-label Stabilization Phase (OSP) of up to 2 weeks on twice daily FP. Those who achieved treatment success entered the Double-blind Maintenance Phase (DMP). They were randomly allocated to receive FP or vehicle twice-weekly on consecutive days for 16 weeks. The primary study endpoint was relapse rate; time to relapse and severity of disease were also studied. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients (29 girls) entered the OSP (23 mild AD) and 49 (26 girls) continued into the DMP. Mean age was 5.5 (SD: 2.8) and 5.1 (SD: 2.3) yrs for FP and vehicle groups, respectively. Four patients withdrew from the DMP (two in every group). Patients treated with FP twice weekly had a 2.7 fold lower risk of experiencing a relapse than patients treated with vehicle (relative risk 2.72, SD: 1.28; p=0.034). FP was also superior to vehicle for delaying time to relapse. Both treatment therapies were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This long-term study shows that twice weekly FP provides an effective maintenance treatment to control the risk of relapse in children with AD.
Asunto(s)
Antiinflamatorios/uso terapéutico , Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , Fluticasona/uso terapéutico , Prevención Secundaria/métodos , Niño , Preescolar , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , MasculinoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Allergic diseases affect 15-20% of the paediatric population in the industrialised world. Most educational centres in Spain do not have health professionals among their staff, and the teachers are in charge of child care in school. The advisability of specific training of the teaching staff should be considered, with the introduction of concrete intervention plans in the event of life-threatening emergencies in schools. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Evaluation of the training needs constitutes the first step in planning an educational project. In this regard, the Health Education Group of the Spanish Society of Clinical Immunology, Allergology and Paediatric Asthma (Grupo de Educación Sanitaria de la Sociedad Española de Inmunología Clínica, Alergología y Asma Pediátrica [SEICAAP]) assessed the knowledge of teachers in five Spanish Autonomous Communities, using a self-administered questionnaire specifically developed for this study. The data obtained were analysed using the SPSS statistical package. RESULTS: A total of 2479 teachers completed the questionnaire. Most of them claimed to know what asthma is, and almost one half considered that they would know how to act in the event of an asthma attack. This proportion was higher among physical education teachers. Most would not know how to act in the case of anaphylaxis or be able to administer the required medication. In general, the teachers expressed interest in receiving training and in having an interventional protocol applicable to situations of this kind. DISCUSSION: It is important to know what the training requirements are in order to develop plans for intervention in the event of an emergency in school. Teachers admit a lack of knowledge on how to deal with these disorders, but express a wish to receive training.