Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 12 de 12
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
J Dtsch Dermatol Ges ; 18(6): 648-657, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32469472


Perianal dermatitis (anal eczema, perianal eczema) is one of the most common proctological conditions. It may occur as a sequela or a presenting symptom of various proctological, dermatological, allergic or pathogen-induced disorders. The three main types of anal eczema are irritant-toxic, atopic and allergic contact dermatitis. Adequate and successful treatment requires a comprehensive diagnostic workup to determine disease etiology and includes treatment/elimination of causative factors as well as nonpharmacological interventions (avoidance of aggravating factors). In addition, adjuvant topical anti-inflammatory and/or specific symptomatic treatment may be required. The present guidelines contain recommendations for the diagnostic and therapeutic management of perianal dermatitis. Target users of these guidelines are clinicians in the fields of dermatology and proctology, as well as all other specialties involved in the management of patients with perianal dermatitis, both in hospital and office-based settings.

J Dtsch Dermatol Ges ; 18(2): 161-179, 2020 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32026639


Tinea capitis describes a dermatophyte infection of scalp and hair that predominately occurs in children. The diagnostic workup includes microscopic examination, culture and/or molecular tests. Treatment is guided by the specific organism involved and should consist of systemic agents as well as adjuvant topical treatment. The aim of the present update of the interdisciplinary German S1 guidelines is to provide dermatologists, pediatricians and general practitioners with a decision tool for selecting and implementing appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic measures in patients with tinea capitis. The guidelines were developed based on current international guidelines, in particular the 2010 European Society for Pediatric Dermatology guidelines and the 2014 British Association of Dermatologists guidelines, as well as on a review of the literature conducted by the guideline committee. This multidisciplinary committee consists of representatives from the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German-Speaking Mycological Society (DMykG), the German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology (DGHM), the German Society of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ) and the German Society for Pediatric Infectious Diseases (DGPI). The Division of Evidence-based Medicine (dEBM) provided methodological assistance. The guidelines were approved by the participating medical societies following a comprehensive internal and external review.

JAMA Dermatol ; 2019 Oct 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31617856


Importance: Systemic psoriasis treatments vary in efficacy and cost but also in time until onset of action. Patients with no response to a first induction treatment are typically switched to another, and some patients require several treatments before they see an improvement. Objective: To determine the most cost-effective sequence of induction treatment through a comparative time-effectiveness analysis of different systemic treatment sequences currently licensed in Germany for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This time-effectiveness analysis used a decision-analytic model set in the German health care system. The population simulated to receive the treatment sequences consisted of adult men and women with psoriasis vulgaris or plaque type psoriasis eligible for systemic treatment. Systematic reviews were performed to generate model input values. Data were collected from November 1 through December 15, 2017, and analyzed from January through August 2018. Interventions: Five treatment sequences frequently used in Germany, identified through an online expert survey (response rate, 10 of 15 [66.7%]), and 4 theoretical sequences starting with a biological agent. Treatments included methotrexate sodium (MTX), cyclosporine (CSA), fumaric acid esters (FAE), adalimumab (ADA), ixekizumab (IXE), infliximab (INF), and secukinumab (SEC). Main Outcomes and Measures: Two health states were defined: responder (patients achieving a Psoriasis Area Severity Index [PASI] ≥75) and nonresponder (PASI <75). Probability values were defined as response rates of PASI-75. Treatment effects were determined by the mean change in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score. Time until onset of action was assessed as weeks until 25% of patients reach PASI-75. Individual time-effectiveness ratios were calculated per treatment sequence as time until onset of action (in weeks) per minimally important difference (MID) in DLQI and were subsequently ranked. Results: Treatment sequences starting with a biological agent, including IXE-INF-SEC (1.4 weeks per DLQI-MID), INF-IXE-SEC (2.05 weeks per DLQI-MID), SEC-IXE-ADA (2.1 weeks per DLQI-MID), and ADA-IXE-SEC (2.8 weeks per DLQI-MID) were more time-effective than frequently used treatment sequences, including MTX-SEC-ADA (6.8 weeks per DLQI-MID), MTX-ADA-IXE (7.0 weeks per DLQI-MID), MTX-ADA-SEC (7.2 weeks per DLQI-MID), MTX-FAE-ADA (10.05 weeks per DLQI-MID), and FAE-MTX-CSA (11.5 weeks per DLQI-MID). The results were robust to deterministic sensitivity analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: When allocating monetary resources, policy makers and regulators may want to consider time until patients experience an MID in their quality of life as an additional outcome measure. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42017074218.

J Dtsch Dermatol Ges ; 17(7): 685-695, 2019 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31012994


Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin condition. Patient education may be one option to improve adherence and coping. The aim of this systematic review is to identify studies evaluating educational interventions for psoriasis patients. The review was conducted following the methods recommended by Cochrane. We searched seven databases, one trial register and three grey literature repositories. Data screening and extraction was performed independently by two reviewers. Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0, ROBINS-I, and NIH tools were used. Additionally, the APEASE criteria were applied. We evaluated 16 studies. Two randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluated patient-practitioner or patient-nurse one-to-one interventions, one RCT assessed a web-based intervention and three RCTs reported group interventions taking place frequently; one RCT reported one-off group sessions. The remaining RCT compared the healthcare professionals involved. The risk of bias rating ranged from "some concerns" to "high". Three RCTs found an effect. We included four controlled clinical trials (CCTs), one of which had an effect. One of the four before-and-after-studies warrants further investigation. Despite similarities in delivery mode across the interventions, patients who were eligible and settings in which interventions were delivered differed. Interventions that included an individual (one-to-one) session appeared to be successful. Two interventions seem suitable for adaptation using APEASE: the topical treatment program and motivational interviewing after climate therapy.

Educação de Pacientes como Assunto/métodos , Psoríase/terapia , Autogestão/métodos , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto