Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2015
In vivo determination of the diclofenac skin reservoir: comparison between passive, occlusive, and iontophoretic application.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of two skin temperature assessment methods after the application of topical revulsive products: Conductive iButton data logger system vs contact-free infrared thermometry.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2020Trial
- Iontophoresis driven concentrations of topically administered diclofenac in skeletal muscle and blood of healthy subjects.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Trial
- Emulgel: A Cutting Edge Approach for Topical Drug Delivery System.Current drug research reviews · 2025Review
- Visualization of Epidermal Reservoir Formation from Topical Diclofenac Gels by Raman Spectroscopy.Journal of pain research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThere is scarce information concerning the pharmacodynamic behavior of topical substances used in the physiotherapy setting. The aim of the present study was to estimate the formation and emptying of the diclofenac (DF) skin reservoir after passive, semiocclusive, and electrically assisted applications of DF. SUBJECTS AND
methodsFive different groups of healthy volunteers (ntotal=60, 23 male and 37 female), participated in this study. A 1% DF (Voltaren Emulgel) formulation (12 mg) was applied on the volar forearms on randomized defined circular skin areas of 7 cm(2). DF was applied for 20 minutes under three different conditions at the same time. The presence of DF in the skin results in a reduction of the methyl nicotinate (MN) response. To estimate the bioavailability of DF in the skin, MN responses at different times following initial DF application (1.5, 6, 24, 32, 48, 72, 96, and 120 hours) were analyzed.
resultsAt 1.5 hours after the initial DF application, a significant decrease in MN response was detected for the occluded and iontophoretic delivery. Passive application resulted in a decrease of the MN response from 6 hours post-DF application. The inhibition remained up to 32 hours post-DF application for the iontophoretic delivery, 48 hours for the occluded application, and 72 hours for the passive delivery. At 96 and 120 hours post-DF application none of the MN responses was inhibited.
conclusionThe formation and emptying of a DF skin reservoir was found to be dependent on the DF-application mode. Penetration-enhanced delivery resulted in a faster emptying of the reservoir.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.