Abstract
Background
Topical corticosteroids (TCS) are used to treat most patients with chronic hand eczema (CHE), but knowledge about TCS-related adverse events in CHE is limited.
Objectives
To investigate patient-reported adverse events to TCS in CHE patients.
Methods
Data on adverse events related to TCS use in patients with CHE were analyzed from the Danish Skin Cohort; a prospective survey of a hospital cohort. We assessed patients’ knowledge about TCS use and adverse event risks, and preference of TCS versus a nonsteroidal topical alternative.
Results
Of 724 adults with CHE (64.0% women; mean age 57.5 [standard deviation 12.8] years), 64.1% reported skin atrophy, 41.4% cracks/fissures, 23.9% bleeding, 45.9% pain/stinging sensation, 40.0% reduced hand dexterity, and 40.2% worsening of CHE signs or symptoms from using TCS. We observed CHE-severity-dependent associations (all groups; P < .0001). Most patients (76.4%) would prefer a nonsteroidal option, 10.9% were neutral/indifferent, and 12.7% would prefer TCS for CHE. The median numerical rating scale-score (ranging from 0 to 10) was 10 (interquartile range 6-10) for preferring a nonsteroidal topical treatment.
Limitations
Differences across TCS formulations were unexplored.
Conclusion
TCS-related cutaneous adverse events were common. There is a desire from patients for novel steroid-free topical alternatives for CHE treatment.
Topical corticosteroids (TCS) are used to treat most patients with chronic hand eczema (CHE), but knowledge about TCS-related adverse events in CHE is limited.
Objectives
To investigate patient-reported adverse events to TCS in CHE patients.
Methods
Data on adverse events related to TCS use in patients with CHE were analyzed from the Danish Skin Cohort; a prospective survey of a hospital cohort. We assessed patients’ knowledge about TCS use and adverse event risks, and preference of TCS versus a nonsteroidal topical alternative.
Results
Of 724 adults with CHE (64.0% women; mean age 57.5 [standard deviation 12.8] years), 64.1% reported skin atrophy, 41.4% cracks/fissures, 23.9% bleeding, 45.9% pain/stinging sensation, 40.0% reduced hand dexterity, and 40.2% worsening of CHE signs or symptoms from using TCS. We observed CHE-severity-dependent associations (all groups; P < .0001). Most patients (76.4%) would prefer a nonsteroidal option, 10.9% were neutral/indifferent, and 12.7% would prefer TCS for CHE. The median numerical rating scale-score (ranging from 0 to 10) was 10 (interquartile range 6-10) for preferring a nonsteroidal topical treatment.
Limitations
Differences across TCS formulations were unexplored.
Conclusion
TCS-related cutaneous adverse events were common. There is a desire from patients for novel steroid-free topical alternatives for CHE treatment.
| Originalsprog | Engelsk |
|---|---|
| Tidsskrift | JAAD International |
| Vol/bind | 14 |
| Sider (fra-til) | 77-83 |
| Antal sider | 7 |
| DOI | |
| Status | Udgivet - 2024 |
Bibliografisk note
Funding Information:Funding sources: None.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.