This activity is intended for primary care physicians, pediatricians, dermatologists, allergists, nurses, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, physician assistants and other members of the healthcare team who treat and manage children at risk for eczema.
The goal of this activity is for learners to be better able to compare different forms of emollients among children with eczema. The healthcare team may be unaware of recent findings comparing emollients in this population.
Upon completion of this activity, participants will:
Medscape, LLC requires every individual in a position to control educational content to disclose all financial relationships with ineligible companies that have occurred within the past 24 months. Ineligible companies are organizations whose primary business is producing, marketing, selling, re-selling, or distributing healthcare products used by or on patients.
All relevant financial relationships for anyone with the ability to control the content of this educational activity are listed below and have been mitigated. Others involved in the planning of this activity have no relevant financial relationships.
This activity was planned by and for the healthcare team, and learners will receive 0.25 Interprofessional Continuing Education (IPCE) credit for learning and change.
Medscape, LLC designates this enduring material for a maximum of 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™ . Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to 0.25 MOC points in the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. Participants will earn MOC points equivalent to the amount of CME credits claimed for the activity. It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABIM MOC credit.
Awarded 0.25 contact hour(s) of nursing continuing professional development for RNs and APNs; 0.25 contact hours are in the area of pharmacology.
Medscape designates this continuing education activity for 0.25 contact hour(s) (0.025 CEUs) (Universal Activity Number: JA0007105-0000-22-277-H01-P).
Medscape, LLC has been authorized by the American Academy of PAs (AAPA) to award AAPA Category 1 CME credit for activities planned in accordance with AAPA CME Criteria. This activity is designated for 0.25 AAPA Category 1 CME credits. Approval is valid until 9/2/2023. PAs should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation.
For questions regarding the content of this activity, contact the accredited provider for this CME/CE activity noted above. For technical assistance, contact [email protected]
There are no fees for participating in or receiving credit for this online educational activity. For information on applicability
and acceptance of continuing education credit for this activity, please consult your professional licensing board.
This activity is designed to be completed within the time designated on the title page; physicians should claim only those
credits that reflect the time actually spent in the activity. To successfully earn credit, participants must complete the
activity online during the valid credit period that is noted on the title page. To receive
AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™, you must receive a minimum score of 75% on the post-test.
Follow these steps to earn CME/CE credit*:
You may now view or print the certificate from your CME/CE Tracker. You may print the certificate but you cannot alter it.
Credits will be tallied in your CME/CE Tracker and archived for 6 years; at any point within this time period you can print
out the tally as well as the certificates from the CME/CE Tracker.
*The credit that you receive is based on your user profile.
CME / ABIM MOC / CE Released: 9/2/2022
Valid for credit through: 9/2/2023, 11:59 PM EST
processing....
Eczema affects approximately 20% of children, many of whom have risk factors for eczema, such as a family history of atopic disease or family history of eczema. Could a simple intervention such as the routine application of emollients during infancy prevent incident eczema? Chalmers and colleagues answered this research question; the results of their study were published in the February 19, 2020, issue of the Lancet.[1]
A total of 1394 newborns with a family history of asthma were randomly assigned to receive skin care advice plus daily emollients or skin care advice only. The main study outcome was incident eczema at age 2 years, as assessed by study nurses blinded to the randomized treatment group.
Adherence to emollients was good: 74% of children continued daily emollients through 12 months of age. Rates of incident eczema at age 2 years were 23% and 25% in the emollient and control groups, respectively, which was a nonsignificant difference. The mean number of skin infections per child in year 1 were 0.23 in the emollient group and 0.15 in the control group (incident rate ratio, 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-2.09).
In general, many clinicians recommend heavier emollients such as ointment for eczema, but there is little evidence as to which emollient is superior in clinical trials. The current study addresses this issue.
Four common emollients (lotions, creams, gels, and ointments) are equally effective in treating childhood eczema, a randomized trial in the United Kingdom found.
"Our findings challenge the previous consensus that ointments are more effective, require less frequent application, and have fewer adverse effects than other emollient types, especially for more severe eczema," the researchers reported in the Lancet Child & Adolescent Health.
Overall satisfaction and intention to continue treatment was highest for families who used lotions and gels, according to the researchers, and "users need to be able to choose from a range of emollient types to suit their needs and preferences."
Daily use of emollients along with topical anti-inflammatory agents such as corticosteroids is widely recommended for eczema, which affects about 13% of children in the United States.[3]
Previous research showed that emollients can reduce flare-ups of eczema but did not establish that 1 product works better than another, according to a Cochrane review published in 2017.[4]
For the new study, researchers at the University of Bristol, England, and colleagues randomly assigned 550 children aged 6 months to 12 years with mild or worse eczema to use 1 of 4 types of emollients for 16 weeks. Each child's general practitioner selected a specific medication from local formularies.
The median age of the children in the study was 4 years, 255 (46%) were girls, and 473 (86%) were White. The mean Patient-Orientated Eczema Measure (POEM) score was 9.3, which indicates moderate disease.
Changes in disease severity reported by parents were similar among the treatment groups, according to the researchers. Over the course of 16 weeks, mean POEM scores improved by 1.9 for those using lotion, 1.7 for cream, 2.2 for gel, and 2.5 for ointment. Also, scores on the Eczema Area Severity Index collected by blinded evaluators at 16 weeks did not vary among the groups.
Nor were there differences in adverse events, which were reported in 205 participants (37%). Worsening of eczema, redness, and itching or inflammation were most common. Stinging was half as common in ointment users as other groups, the researchers reported.
With more than 100 emollients on the market in the United Kingdom, the researchers said that comparing these products by type rather than performing head-to-head comparisons rendered the findings more generalizable.
"A trial and error approach to prescribing is common, which can lead to underuse, waste, and frustration for families," they wrote.
Heidi Kong, MD, a senior investigator and chief of the Cutaneous Microbiome and Inflammation Section at the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, said that the findings may be relevant in the United States, where similar emollients are available.
However, the study's racial homogeneity could limit its applicability to the United States, said Dr Kong and Robert Sidbury, MD, MPH, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Washington, Seattle, and chief of dermatology at Seattle Children's Hospital. Neither Dr Kong nor Dr Sidbury was involved in the new study.
Another limitation is that fewer study participants had severe disease, which can make a patient more susceptible to stinging or other discomfort, Dr Kong told Medscape Medical News.
Still, Dr Kong said that the findings shift the focus to "the very important concept of considering individual patient and parent preferences on emollient type when making recommendations. If a type of emollient is preferable to a patient, they are more likely to use it."
Although ointments can be messy, uncomfortable, and promote inflamed hair follicles, clinicians and parents have promoted them "because common sense suggests they work better" because of being thicker and longer lasting, Dr Sidbury told Medscape Medical News. "This study suggests common sense may not be so sensible in this case," he added.
The study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research, a United Kingdom government agency. One researcher in the Best Emollients for Eczema study is a consultant on an educational grant funded by Pfizer that is unrelated to the trial. Twenty other researchers involved with the study declared no competing interests. Dr Sidbury is a speaker for Beiersdorf, which makes emollients. Dr Kong reported no relevant financial relationships.
Lancet Child & Adolescent Health. Published August 1, 2022.