Publication: Randomized investigator-blinded comparative study of moisturizer containing 4-t-butylcyclohexanol and licochalcone A versus 0.02% triamcinolone acetonide cream in facial dermatitis
Issued Date
2018-12-01
Resource Type
ISSN
14732165
14732130
14732130
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85041584389
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology. Vol.17, No.6 (2018), 1130-1135
Suggested Citation
Waranya Boonchai, Supenya Varothai, Waranaree Winayanuwattikun, Sutasinee Phaitoonvatanakij, Pichanee Chaweekulrat, Pranee Kasemsarn Randomized investigator-blinded comparative study of moisturizer containing 4-t-butylcyclohexanol and licochalcone A versus 0.02% triamcinolone acetonide cream in facial dermatitis. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology. Vol.17, No.6 (2018), 1130-1135. doi:10.1111/jocd.12499 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/46145
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Randomized investigator-blinded comparative study of moisturizer containing 4-t-butylcyclohexanol and licochalcone A versus 0.02% triamcinolone acetonide cream in facial dermatitis
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Background: Facial dermatitis can result from various conditions, some of which are of a chronic and relapsing nature. The use of topical corticosteroid therapy may lead to additional adverse effects. Objective: To compare the efficacy of moisturizer containing 4-t-butylcyclohexanol, which acts as a sensitivity regulator, and licochalcone A, an anti-inflammatory agent from the licorice plant Glycyrrhiza inflata, with that of 0.02% triamcinolone acetonide (TA) for the treatment of facial dermatitis. Methods: This was a randomized, prospective, investigator-blinded study. Eighty participants with mild to moderate facial dermatitis were randomly treated with either the test facial moisturizer or 0.02% TA twice daily for the first 2 weeks. For the subsequent 2 weeks, all patients used only the test moisturizer. Clinical assessment by investigators, bioengineering measurements, patients' subjective evaluation, and clinical photography were performed at baseline, week 2, and week 4. Results: Both treatments showed a statistically significant improvement with regard to physician clinical assessment, skin hydration, transepidermal water loss, and patient-assessed visual analog scale after 2 and 4 weeks of treatment compared with baseline. The test facial moisturizer produced better skin hydration than TCS. The improvement in TEWL after 4 weeks of using the test moisturizer was comparable with 2-week treatment with 0.02% TA cream. However, subjective evaluation by patients indicated that TA more rapidly improved sensation sensitivity. Conclusion: The test facial moisturizer was slower than 0.02% TA in improving facial dermatitis, but showed greater benefit in erythema control and skin hydration.