Published in:
01-10-2015 | Systematic Review
Clinical Effectiveness of Moisturizers in Atopic Dermatitis and Related Disorders: A Systematic Review
Authors:
Jonatan D. Lindh, Maria Bradley
Published in:
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology
|
Issue 5/2015
Login to get access
Abstract
Background
Moisturizers are widely used for atopic dermatitis (AD) and related conditions, but available evidence of their effectiveness has not been reviewed in a systematic fashion.
Objectives
Our objective was to investigate the effectiveness of emollients, as a group and individually, in the treatment of AD and related conditions, by means of a systematic review.
Data Sources
Studies indexed in MEDLINE and/or Embase before 16 January 2015.
Study Eligibility Criteria
Controlled clinical studies comparing the clinical effect of a moisturizer against its vehicle, another moisturizer, or no treatment were eligible. For the outcomes transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and stratum corneum hydration, uncontrolled before–after designs were also eligible.
Participants
Participants were patients with AD, irritant hand dermatitis, and/or ichthyosis vulgaris.
Results
Out of the 595 publications initially identified, 45 (48 studies, 3262 patients) were eligible for inclusion. A vast majority of studies indicate that moisturizers have beneficial effects on clinical symptoms [SCORAD (SCORing Atopic Dermatitis) reductions ranging from 0 to 2.7 points], TEWL (range 0 to −12.2 g/m2h) and stratum corneum hydration (range +8 to +100 %). Direct comparisons between individual moisturizers are still scarce, but the clinical effect appears to be much more well-documented for urea and glycerin than, for example, propylene glycol, lactate, ceramide, and aluminum chlorohydrate. Compared with urea studies, glycerin studies were more often associated with a high risk of bias.
Limitations
Due to differences in study designs and outcome measures, a quantitative meta-analytic approach was not deemed feasible, and formal indicators of publication bias such as funnel plots could not be used. However, a large number of moderately sized studies with positive outcomes could be compatible with selective publishing of favourable results.
Conclusions
The clinical effect of moisturizers is well-documented. Urea-based preparations may be preferable as a first-line treatment, but there is an unmet need for well-powered comparisons between individual moisturizers.