Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
BMJ ; 381: e074349, 2023 05 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318930

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of oral spironolactone for acne vulgaris in adult women. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, phase 3, double blind, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Primary and secondary healthcare, and advertising in the community and on social media in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Women (≥18 years) with facial acne for at least six months, judged to warrant oral antibiotics. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 50 mg/day spironolactone or matched placebo until week six, increasing to 100 mg/day spironolactone or placebo until week 24. Participants could continue using topical treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was Acne-Specific Quality of Life (Acne-QoL) symptom subscale score at week 12 (range 0-30, where higher scores reflect improved QoL). Secondary outcomes were Acne-QoL at week 24, participant self-assessed improvement; investigator's global assessment (IGA) for treatment success; and adverse reactions. RESULTS: From 5 June 2019 to 31 August 2021, 1267 women were assessed for eligibility, 410 were randomly assigned to the intervention (n=201) or control group (n=209) and 342 were included in the primary analysis (n=176 in the intervention group and n=166 in the control group). Baseline mean age was 29.2 years (standard deviation 7.2), 28 (7%) of 389 were from ethnicities other than white, with 46% mild, 40% moderate, and 13% severe acne. Mean Acne-QoL symptom scores at baseline were 13.2 (standard deviation 4.9) and at week 12 were 19.2 (6.1) for spironolactone and 12.9 (4.5) and 17.8 (5.6) for placebo (difference favouring spironolactone 1.27 (95% confidence interval 0.07 to 2.46), adjusted for baseline variables). Scores at week 24 were 21.2 (5.9) for spironolactone and 17.4 (5.8) for placebo (difference 3.45 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 4.75), adjusted). More participants in the spironolactone group reported acne improvement than in the placebo group: no significant difference was reported at week 12 (72% v 68%, odds ratio 1.16 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 1.91)) but significant difference was noted at week 24 (82% v 63%, 2.72 (1.50 to 4.93)). Treatment success (IGA classified) at week 12 was 31 (19%) of 168 given spironolactone and nine (6%) of 160 given placebo (5.18 (2.18 to 12.28)). Adverse reactions were slightly more common in the spironolactone group with more headaches reported (20% v 12%; p=0.02). No serious adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Spironolactone improved outcomes compared with placebo, with greater differences at week 24 than week 12. Spironolactone is a useful alternative to oral antibiotics for women with acne. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12892056.


Subject(s)
Acne Vulgaris , Spironolactone , Adult , Humans , Female , Spironolactone/adverse effects , Quality of Life , Wales , Acne Vulgaris/drug therapy , Acne Vulgaris/complications , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Double-Blind Method , Immunoglobulin A , Treatment Outcome
2.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 9: 1024879, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2262821

ABSTRACT

Background: Dermatological conditions can have a substantial impact on psychological as well as physical health yet dedicated face-to-face psychological support for patients is lacking. Thus, individuals may require additional support to self-manage dermatological conditions effectively. Digital technology can contribute to long-term condition management, but knowledge of the effectiveness of digital interventions addressing psychological (cognitive, emotional, and behavioural) aspects of dermatological conditions is limited. Objectives: To identify, determine the effectiveness, and explore people's views and experiences of digital interventions supporting the psychological health of people with dermatological conditions. Methods: A mixed methods systematic review informed by JBI methodology. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO. Eight electronic databases were searched for papers written between January 2002 and October 2021. Data screening and extraction were conducted in Covidence. The methodological quality of studies were scrutinised against JBI critical appraisal tools. Intervention characteristics were captured using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist and guide. Data were synthesised using a convergent segregated approach. The results were reported in a narrative summary. Results: Twenty-three papers were identified from 4,883 references, including 15 randomised controlled trials. Nineteen interventions were condition-specific, 13 were delivered online, 16 involved an educational component, and 7 endorsed established, evidence-based therapeutic approaches. Improvements in knowledge, mood, quality of life, the therapeutic relationship, and reduced disease severity in the short to medium term, were reported, although there was substantial heterogeneity within the literature. Thirteen studies captured feedback from users, who considered various digital interventions as convenient and helpful for improving knowledge, emotion regulation, and personal control, but technical and individual barriers to use were reported. Use of established qualitative methodologies was limited and, in some cases, poorly reported. Conclusion: Some web-based digital psychological interventions seem to be acceptable to people living with mainly psoriasis and eczema. Whilst some digital interventions benefitted cognitive and emotional factors, heterogeneity and inconsistencies in the literature meant definitive statements about their effectiveness could not be drawn. Interdisciplinary and patient-centred approaches to research are needed to develop and test quality digital interventions supporting the psychological health of adults living with common and rare dermatological conditions. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=285435], identifier [CRD42021285435].

3.
BMJ Open ; 11(8): e053876, 2021 08 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1376514

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Acne is one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases worldwide and can have significant psychosocial impact and cause permanent scarring. Spironolactone, a potassium-sparing diuretic, has antiandrogenic properties, potentially reducing sebum production and hyperkeratinisation in acne-prone follicles. Dermatologists have prescribed spironolactone for acne in women for over 30 years, but robust clinical study data are lacking. This study seeks to evaluate whether spironolactone is clinically effective and cost-effective in treating acne in women. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Women (≥18 years) with persistent facial acne requiring systemic therapy are randomised to receive one tablet per day of 50 mg spironolactone or a matched placebo until week 6, increasing to up to two tablets per day (total of 100 mg spironolactone or matched placebo) until week 24, along with usual topical therapy if desired. Study treatment stops at week 24; participants are informed of their treatment allocation and enter an unblinded observational follow-up period for up to 6 months (up to week 52 after baseline). Primary outcome is the Acne-specific Quality of Life (Acne-QoL) symptom subscale score at week 12. Secondary outcomes include Acne-QoL total and subscales; participant acne self-assessment recorded on a 6-point Likert scale at 6, 12, 24 weeks and up to 52 weeks; Investigator's Global Assessment at weeks 6 and 12; cost and cost effectiveness are assessed over 24 weeks. Aiming to detect a group difference of 2 points on the Acne-QoL symptom subscale (SD 5.8, effect size 0.35), allowing for 20% loss to follow-up, gives a sample size of 398 participants. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol was approved by Wales Research Ethics Committee (18/WA/0420). Follow-up to be completed in early 2022. Findings will be disseminated to participants, peer-reviewed journals, networks and patient groups, on social media, on the study website and the Southampton Clinical Trials Unit website to maximise impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12892056;Pre-results.


Subject(s)
Acne Vulgaris , Spironolactone , Acne Vulgaris/drug therapy , Adult , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Spironolactone/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL