From the Journals

No benefits from bath emollients for childhood eczema

View on the News

Evidence gap on bath emollients addressed

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom currently recommends regular use of “emollient wash products” for children with eczema, despite the fact that little good evidence of their benefit exists. It is therefore heartening that this study has largely addressed that evidence gap: There was no statistically significant difference between those children prescribed one of three bath additives in addition to standard care and those who received standard care alone.

However, there is still the question of whether younger children – particularly those who are bathed daily – might still benefit from bath emollients. Likewise, children who experience recurrent skin infections may derive some additional benefit from emollient bath additives with antiseptic properties.

Carsten Flohr, MD, is with the St. John’s Institute of Dermatology at Kings College London, and Amina Ahmed is a patient panel member at the Centre of Evidence-Based Dermatology in Nottingham, England. These comments are taken from an editorial accompanying the article by Santer et al. (BMJ. 2018 May 2. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k1791.) No conflicts of interest were declared.


 

FROM THE BMJ

Emollient bath additives do not appear to offer any clinical benefit for childhood eczema, according to an open-label randomized trial.

In a trial of 482 children with atopic dermatitis who were randomized to either use of prescribed emollient bath additives regularly for 12 months or no additives, in addition to usual care, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the patient-oriented eczema measure (POEM) – a score of symptoms in the previous week – for the first 16 weeks of treatment, reported Miriam Santer, MD, of the University of Southampton, England, and her coauthors. The mean POEM score was 7.5 in the bath additives group and 8.4 in the no bath additives group.

atopic dermatitis on a baby's foot LucaLorenzelli/Thinkstock
Even after researchers controlled for baseline eczema, ethnic group, topical corticosteroid use, and soap substitute use, the score was 0.41 points higher in the no bath additives group, compared with the bath additives group – well below the minimal clinically important difference of 3 points.

There also was no significant effect of emollient bath additives on the secondary outcomes, which included POEM over 52 weeks, dermatitis family impact, generic quality of life, number of eczema exacerbations, or topical corticosteroid or topical calcineurin inhibitor use.

The authors noted that there was the suggestion of benefit in children who bathed five or more times a week, and in children aged under 5 years, but in both cases, the numbers were small.

“Although there is evidence for the need for leave-on emollients and widespread clinical consensus around soap substitutes, there is less agreement about the potential additional benefits of bath additives and a dearth of evidence on their effectiveness,” wrote Dr. Santer and her associates. “Bath additives are, however, widely prescribed at a cost of more than 23 million pounds ($33 million US; 26 million euros) annually to the National Health Service in England.”

The bath emollients used in the study included Aveeno bath oil, and Oilatum bath additive and Balneum bath oil – products available largely in the United Kingdom – along with others. Adherence was reasonable, with 93% of participants in the emollient group using bath additives more than half or all the time, and 92% of those in the no bath additives group using them less than half the time or never.

Pages

Recommended Reading

FDA approves certolizumab label update for pregnancy, breastfeeding
Clinician Reviews
Study using U.K. data quantifies infection risk associated with psoriasis
Clinician Reviews
Farmer Flummoxed by Finger Lesion
Clinician Reviews
Melanoma in young children may be biologically distinct from that in teens
Clinician Reviews
Chikungunya infection in children masquerades as SJS-TEN
Clinician Reviews
The Rash That Outlasts
Clinician Reviews
Nitric oxide–generating dressing holds promise for diabetic foot ulcers
Clinician Reviews
Bubble Trouble
Clinician Reviews
Biopsies for skin cancer detection: Dispelling the myths
Clinician Reviews
HIV infection linked to higher risk of non-melanoma skin cancer
Clinician Reviews