A multicentre randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of ion-exchange water softeners for the treatment of eczema in children: the Softened Water Eczema Trial (SWET).

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether installation of an ion-exchange water softener in the home could improve atopic eczema in children and, if so, to establish its likely cost and cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: An observer-blind, parallel-group randomised controlled trial of 12 weeks duration followed by a 4-week observational period. Eczema was assessed by research nurses blinded to intervention at baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks and 16 weeks. The primary outcome was analysed as intent-to-treat, using the randomised allocation rather than actual treatment received. A secondary per-protocol analysis excluded participants who failed to receive their allocated treatment and who were deemed to be protocol violators. SETTING: Secondary and primary care referral centres in England (UK) serving a variety of ethnic and social groups and including children living in both urban and periurban homes. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred and thirty-six children (aged 6 months to 16 years) with moderate/severe atopic eczema, living in homes in England supplied by hard water (≥ 200 mg/l calcium carbonate). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to either installation of an ion-exchange water softener plus usual eczema care (group A) for 12 weeks or usual eczema care alone (group B) for 12 weeks. This was followed by a 4-week observational period, during which water softeners were switched off/removed from group A homes and installed in group B homes. Standard procedure was to soften all water in the home, but to provide mains (hard) water at a faucet-style tap in the kitchen for drinking and cooking. Participants were therefore exposed to softened water for bathing and washing of clothes, but continued to drink mains (hard) water. Usual care was defined as any treatment that the child was currently using in order to control his or her eczema. New treatment regimens used during the trial period were documented. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the difference between group A and group B in mean change in disease severity at 12 weeks compared with baseline, as measured using the Six Area, Six Sign Atopic Dermatitis (SASSAD) score. This is an objective severity scale completed by blinded observers (research nurses) unaware of the allocated intervention. Secondary outcomes included use of topical medications, night-time movement, patient-reported eczema severity and a number of quality of life measures. A planned subgroup analysis was conducted, based on participants with at least one mutation in the gene encoding filaggrin (a protein in the skin thought to be important for normal skin barrier function). RESULTS: Target recruitment was achieved (n = 336). The analysed population included 323 children who had complete data. The mean change in primary outcome (SASSAD) at 12 weeks was -5.0 [standard deviation (SD) 8.8] for the water softener group (group A) and -5.7 (SD 9.8) for the usual care group (group B) [mean difference 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.37 to 2.69, p = 0.53]. The per-protocol analysis supported the main analysis, and there was no evidence that the treatment effect varied between children with and without mutations in the filaggrin gene. No between-group differences were found in the three secondary outcomes that were assessed blindly (use of topical medications; night-time movement; proportion showing reasonable, good or excellent improvement). Small, but statistically significant, differences in favour of the water softener were found in three of the secondary outcomes that were assessed by participants [Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM); well-controlled weeks (WCWs); Dermatitis Family Index (DFI)]. The results of the economic evaluation, and the uncertainty surrounding them, suggest that ion-exchange water softeners are unlikely to be a cost-effective intervention for children with atopic eczema from an NHS perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Water softeners provided no additional benefit to usual care in this study population. Small, but statistically significant, differences were found in some secondary outcomes as reported by parents, but it is likely that such improvements were the result of response bias. Whether or not the wider benefits of installing a water softener in the home are sufficient to justify the purchase of a softener is something for individual householders to consider on a case-by-case basis. This trial demonstrated overwhelming demand for non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of eczema, and this is something that should be considered when prioritising future research in the field. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN71423189. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 15, No. 8. See the HTA programme website for further project information. Results of this trial are also published at www.plosmedicine.org.

A multicentre randomized controlled trial of ion-exchange water softeners for the treatment of eczema in children: protocol for the Softened Water Eczema Trial (SWET) (ISRCTN: 71423189).

BACKGROUND: There is epidemiological evidence linking increased water hardness with increased eczema prevalence. A number of plausible mechanisms can be forwarded to suggest why hard water could exacerbate eczema. The most likely explanation is increased soap usage in hard water areas, the deposits of which can cause skin irritation in individuals with eczema. OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost and cost-effectiveness of ion-exchange water softeners for the treatment of eczema in children. PATIENTS/METHODS: Three hundred and ten children aged 6 months to 16 years, with moderate to severe eczema. The children must live in hard water areas (>or= 200 mg L(-1) of calcium carbonate) and have a home that is suitable for the installation of a water softener. This is a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial of 12 weeks duration followed by a 4-week cross-over period. RESULTS/ANALYSIS PLAN: PRIMARY OUTCOME: difference in the mean change in disease severity (Six Area, Six Sign Atopic Dermatitis score) at 12 weeks compared with baseline. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: (i) proportion of time spent moving during the night; (ii) self-reported global changes in eczema severity; (iii) amount of topical treatment used; (iv) Patient Oriented Eczema Measure; (v) number of totally controlled and well controlled weeks; (vi) impact on health-related quality of life for the child (EQ-5D) and the family (Dermatitis Family Impact questionnaire); and (vii) cost-effectiveness. It is planned that recruitment will be completed by the end of 2008 and results will be available towards the end of 2009.

Softeners for hardness removal.

The depletion of water resources, both surface and subsurface and deterioration of water quality made researchers and policy makers to think of the possible remedies to make water sources potable / wholesome. There is a need to address the problems of hardness and fluoride in subsurface water on priority basis. In this direction, bench scale studies were conducted to evaluate the performance of water softeners. Indepth studies were carried out at University B.D.T College of Engineering, Davangere, Karnataka, to assess the performance of bench scale softeners of D to H ratio 1:2, 1:3, 1:4 in removing hardness of varied concentrations from both synthetic and natural water samples. Studies revealed that irrespective of D to H ratio of softeners, the waters having hardness concentration up to 1000 mg/l can be treated to the same degree (81.68% and above). The findings of regeneration studies and cost economics are also summarized in this paper.