Phillip Berry

Background: Parents and carers of children with eczema often underuse emollient therapy, essential to repairing and protecting the defective skin barrier in atopic eczema. Educational interventions delivered by specialist dermatology nurses in hospital settings have been shown to improve emollient use and reduce symptoms of atopic eczema, but benefits of community-based interventions are uncertain. Support and information about appropriate care may often be inadequate for patients and carers in the community.Methods: A multifaceted educational support programme was evaluated as a method of increasing emollient use and reducing atopic eczema in children. Support provided for parents and carers included an educational DVD, online daily diary and telephone helpline. The before and after study included 136 British children and their parents, providing baseline and 12 week follow-up data while receiving the programme. Measures included emollient use, POEM and PEST scores, and cost of care.Results: Average emollient use increased by 87.6 g (95% CI: 81.9 to 119.5 g, p = 0.001) from baseline with the change being immediate and persistent. The POEM score reduced on average by 5.38 (95% CI: 4.36 to 6.41, p = 0.001), a 47% reduction from baseline. Similarly the PEST score reduced on average by 0.61 (95% CI: 0.47 to 0.75, p = 0.001), a 48% reduction from baseline. Sleep disturbance was reduced by 1.27 nights per week (95% CI: 0.85 to 1.68, p = 0.001) and parental feeling of control improved by 1.32 points (95% CI: 1.16 to 1.48, p = 0.001). From the NHS perspective, the programme was cost neutral overall within the study period.Conclusion: A community-based multifaceted educational support programme greatly increased emollient use, reducing symptoms of atopic eczema and general practitioner contacts, without increasing cost. Significant benefits may accrue to the families and carers of children with atopic eczema due to improved sleep patterns and greater feeling of control. PEST, a new simple measure of acute and remitting atopic eczema severity designed to help parents and children to monitor and manage eczema, merits further evaluation.

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetic properties of sodium ibuprofen and ibuprofen acid incorporating poloxamer with standard ibuprofen acid tablets. Methods: Twenty-two healthy volunteers were enrolled into this randomised, single-dose, 3-way crossover, open-label, single-centre, pharmacokinetic study. After 14 hours' fasting, participants received a single dose of 2 × 200 mg ibuprofen acid tablets (standard ibuprofen), 2 × 256 mg ibuprofen sodium dihydrate tablets (sodium ibuprofen; each equivalent to 200 mg ibuprofen acid) and 2 × 200 mg ibuprofen acid incorporating 60 mg poloxamer 407 (ibuprofen/poloxamer). A washout period of 2-7 days separated consecutive dosing days. On each of the 3 treatment days, blood samples were collected post dose for pharmacokinetic analyses and any adverse events recorded. Plasma concentration of ibuprofen was assessed using a liquid chromatographic-mass spectrometry procedure in negative ion mode. A standard statistical ANOVA model, appropriate for bioequivalence studies, was used and ratios of 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: T_max for sodium ibuprofen was less than half that of standard ibuprofen (median 35 min vs 90 min, respectively; P = 0.0002) and C_max was significantly higher (41.47 μg/mL vs 31.88 μg/mL; ratio test/reference = 130.06%, 90% CI 118.86-142.32%). Ibuprofen/poloxamer was bioequivalent to the standard ibuprofen formulation, despite its T_max being on average 20 minutes shorter than standard ibuprofen (median 75 mins vs 90 mins, respectively; P = 0.1913), as the ratio of test/reference = 110.48% (CI 100.96-120.89%), which fell within the 80-125% limit of the CPMP and FDA guidelines for bioequivalence. The overall extent of absorption was similar for the three formulations, which were all well tolerated. Conclusion: In terms of T_max, ibuprofen formulated as a sodium salt was absorbed twice as quickly as from standard ibuprofen acid. The addition of poloxamer to ibuprofen acid did not significantly affect absorption.

To compare the onset of action and efficacy of sodium ibuprofen (ibuprofen sodium dihydrate) and ibuprofen acid incorporating poloxamer (ibuprofen/poloxamer) with that of acetaminophen and placebo in patients with post-operative dental pain. A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, active comparator, two-centre study assessing the analgesic efficacy of sodium ibuprofen (512 mg, equivalent to 400 mg ibuprofen acid), ibuprofen/poloxamer (containing 400 mg ibuprofen acid and 120 mg poloxamer 407), acetaminophen (1000 mg) and placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe pain after third molar extraction (n = 322). Onset of action was assessed using the two-stopwatch technique, and pain intensity and relief were measured using validated traditional descriptor scales. Significantly more patients achieved confirmed perceptible pain relief and meaningful pain relief with sodium ibuprofen (96.3%, P < 0.0001) and ibuprofen/poloxamer (90.0%, P = 0.0005) than with acetaminophen (67.5%). The onset of action of both ibuprofen formulations was comparable with that of acetaminophen up to 45 min post-dose; a marked divergence in onset times in favour of the ibuprofen formulations occurred from 45 min onward. Mean values for the area under the pain relief and pain intensity differences curve (0–6 h) were significantly greater for sodium ibuprofen (3.46) and ibuprofen acid (3.49) than for acetaminophen (2.25) (P < 0.001). Other pain relief and pain intensity endpoints favoured both ibuprofen formulations over acetaminophen. Distractibility from pain (6 h) was significantly greater with the ibuprofen formulations than with acetaminophen (P = 0.008 for sodium ibuprofen; P = 0.03 for ibuprofen/poloxamer). In patients receiving ibuprofen, pain interfered less with daily activities (at 1 and 6 h) than in those receiving acetaminophen (P ≤ 0.015). Both ibuprofen formulations had significantly better mean global assessment scores than acetaminophen (P < 0.001). Tolerability profiles of the ibuprofen formulations were comparable with that of acetaminophen. Compared with acetaminophen, sodium ibuprofen was associated with significantly greater analgesic efficacy, pain relief in a greater proportion of patients and greater patient satisfaction.