Consensus statement on the management of chronic hand eczema.

The management of chronic hand eczema is often inadequate. There are currently no evidence-based guidelines specifically for the management of chronic hand eczema, and evidence for established treatments for hand eczema is not of sufficient quality to guide clinical practice. This consensus statement, based on a review of published data and clinical practice in both primary and secondary care, is intended to guide the management of chronic hand eczema. It describes the epidemiology and pathogenesis of hand eczema, its diagnosis and its effect on patients' quality of life. Management strategies include a skin education programme, lifestyle changes, and the use of emollients, barriers and soap substitutes. Topical drug therapy includes topical steroids and calcineurin inhibitors. Treatment with psoralen ultraviolet A and systemic therapies may then be appropriate, although there is no strong evidence of efficacy. Alitretinoin has been shown to be effective in a randomized controlled trial, and is currently the only treatment specifically licensed for the treatment of hand eczema. Recommendations for management are summarized in a treatment algorithm.

Quality of care in patients with psoriasis: an initial clinical study of an international disease management programme.

BACKGROUND: Patients with psoriasis have to cope with their disease for many years or even throughout their entire life. To provide optimal care, a disease management programme was developed. This programme consisted of disease education, disease management training, and psychological support, together with topical treatment. OBJECTIVE: To test a disease management programme in dermatological practice, to assess patients' satisfaction with this programme, and adherence to topical treatment. Additionally, disease severity and quality of life were assessed. METHODS: An initial clinical investigation was conducted in 10 European treatment centres. A total of 330 patients were included. Patient satisfaction, adherence, disease severity and quality of life were measured with study-specific and standardized self-report questionnaires. RESULTS: Patients reported a high degree of satisfaction with the programme, and a high degree of adherence to topical treatment. Disease severity and quality of life significantly improved. The programme was well received by the participating professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The disease management programme was found to be a useful tool in the management of psoriasis, providing patients with relief from the burden of psoriasis in everyday life. A full-scale evaluation is recommended.

Double-blind, randomised, multicentre, parallel group study comparing a 1% coal tar preparation (Exorex) with a 5% coal tar preparation (Alphosyl) in chronic plaque psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Exorex lotion is a novel formulation of prepared coal tar indicated for the treatment of psoriasis. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of 1% prepared coal tar lotion versus 5% coal tar extract in patients with mild to moderate plaque psoriasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a double-blind, randomised controlled study. Patients initially entered a 7-day washout period, during which they applied a yellow soft paraffin plus emulsifying wax ointment used as an emollient three times a day to their plaques. They were then randomised to receive treatment with 1% coal tar (Exorex) lotion or 5% conventional coal tar lotion (Alphosyl), three times a day for 12 weeks. Both treatment groups continued to apply the emollient throughout the duration of the study. Two target plaques were selected at entry for assessment. The clinical measures used were: 1) Total Sign Score (TSS), the sum of 5-point rating scores for erythema, induration and scaling averaged for the two target plaques (range 0-12), 2) the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), and 3) patient and investigator 7-point global assessments of improvement at 12 weeks. Patients were assessed at 0, 4, 8 and 12 weeks during the treatment period or at the point of withdrawal. Spontaneously reported and observed adverse events were noted. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty four of 338 randomised patients were evaluable (ITT analysis): 158 patients received 1% coal tar lotion and 166 patients received conventional coal tar. Both groups showed decreases from baseline to end of treatment in mean TSS (decrease of 2.4 points from 5.6 to 3.2 with 1% coal tar lotion and 1.8 points from 5.5 to 3.7 with conventional coal tar), and mean PASI (decrease of 2.4 points with 1% coal tar lotion and 1.5 points with conventional coal tar). Two hundred and twenty eight patients completed the full course of treatment. There was a statistically significant treatment difference in the percentage change in mean TSS at week 12, in favour of 1% coal tar lotion (-10.6%, 95% CI -20.6% to -0.5%, p=0.04). There was also a difference between treatments in the change in mean PASI in favour of 1% coal tar that was of borderline statistical significance (-11.7%, 95% CI -23.8% to 0.4%, p=0.06). Investigator global assessments also favoured 1% coal tar lotion (38% vs. 27% of patients showed clearance or marked improvement). The 1% coal tar lotion had a similar safety profile to 5% conventional coal tar lotion with the majority of treatment-related events being mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: 1% coal tar lotion is more effective than a conventional coal tar lotion in mild to moderate psoriasis and may be preferred for first-line topical treatment.

Advised best practice for the use of emollients in eczema and other dry skin conditions.

The recent Dermatological Care Working Group report highlighted important deficiencies in the dermatology service in the UK and recommended that care should move closer to the patient. The report stated that 'expert patients' could become 'sharers in their care' and are best placed to improve their own self management. One area that could benefit greatly from increased patient education and participation is the use of emollients. Emollients are frequently prescribed for patients with eczema and other dry skin conditions. Although the benefits of emollient therapy are widely accepted, prescribing practices vary considerably, often according to physicians' individual preferences. Patients can receive confusing or conflicting treatment advice, leading to frustration, non-compliance, and difficulty in following an effective regimen. To promote the effective use of emollients it is important for patients and health professionals to understand the functions of the skin and the principles of emollient use and application. We propose a set of simple guidelines for emollient therapy in eczema care to improve day-to-day management by health professionals in the community and to promote consistent practices by patients. These guidelines form the ABC dry skin and eczema management programme supported by the National Eczema Society and accredited by the British Skin Foundation.