Clinical Efficacy of Plai Gel Containing 1% Plai Oil in the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Acne Vulgaris

The objective of this study is to test the efficacy and safety of Plai gel containing 1% Plai oil in treatment of mild to moderate acne vulgaris. Randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled trial was conducted in 60 healthy volunteers. The primary outcome is expressed in percentage reduction in total acne lesions (inflammatory lesions and non inflammatory lesions). Assessments were performed at week 2, 4, and 8. A percentage reduction in total acne lesions in plai group was higher than the placebo group at week 2 [6 times (95%CI: -16 to 28)] and week 4 [12 times (95%CI: -12 to 35)]. A percentage reduction in noninflammatory acne lesions in plai group was higher than the placebo group at week 2 [14 times (95%CI: -17 to 43)] and week 4 [26 times (95%CI: -4 to 64)]. However, such differences did not show statistical significance. At week 8, there were no differences between two groups. The plai group showed a significant reduction of noninflammatory acne lesions from the baseline at week 2 (45 ± 29 lesions) and week 4 (41 ± 25 lesions), while the placebo did not so. A percentage reduction in inflammatory acne lesions in plai group was lower than the placebo group at week 2 [2.9 (95%CI:-37.6 to 31.8)] and week 4 [12.1 (95%CI:-42.2 to 17.9), however, there were no significant differences. For the secondary outcome, success rate at week 8 was 39% in plai group and 31% in placebo group. However, this difference did not show statistical significance. Plai gel was safe. Adverse events were not found in this study. The compliance to use plai gel was greater than 90%. In conclusion, plai gel is promising to be used in treatment of mild to moderate acne, which the effect could be seen within the first month as compared to placebo.

The Application of Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Assessing the Construct Validity of SF-36 Thai version in Chronic Renal Disease Patients

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to assess the construct validity of SF-36 Thai version in chronic renal disease patients. The patients (n=466) were interviewed at Srinagarind Hospital during March-May 2005. Data were randomly divided into two datasets for cross-validation. The first dataset was analyzed using EFA to reveal alternative models (AMs), while the second dataset was analyzed using CFA to compare the AMs and the original model assigned by SF-36 developers (Ware model). The construct validity of SF-36 Thai version in chronic renal disease patients was confirmed in this study. Results from CFA indicated that the Ware model was more parsimony than two AMs. The constructs of two AMs that resulted from the EFA differed from that was assigned by Ware et at. The results replicated the previous study in a Taiwanese general population, and these results confirmed the suggestion of using CFA to assess the construct validity of known construct measure.