ArticleDermatologic therapy2022
Home treatment of single cutaneous warts combining face-to-face and teledermatology consultation: A new perspective.
Article in Dermatologic therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- New Developing Treatments for Molluscum Contagiosum.Dermatology and therapy · 2022Review
- Home treatment of single cutaneous warts combining face-to-face and teledermatology consultation: A new perspective.Dermatologic therapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic, teledermatology services were set up and enhanced to take care of those benign conditions like cutaneous warts (CWs) which, if undiagnosed or treated with delay, could have worsened, enlarged, and potentially spread to the community. The aim of this hybrid exploratory trial was to combine face-to-face clinical and dermoscopic evaluation with teledermatology follow-up in the management of CWs with a cryogenic pen based on nitrous oxide for home treatment. Twelve adult patients affected by CWs were enrolled. During the first face-to-face visit, single CWs were selected for the study by clinical and dermoscopic evaluation. The home schedule consisted of one application to be repeated after 2 weeks, when signs of CWs were still evident. Patients were also asked to send a clinical photo of the treated lesion at weekly intervals. A final face-to-face evaluation was scheduled to verify the response to home treatment by clinical and dermoscopy evaluation. A total of 20 CWs located on the trunk and the extremities were treated: a complete clinical and dermoscopic resolution was observed in 16 out of 20 lesions (80%), and a partial response in two cases. The adverse events observed during treatment were comparable to those normally observed with cryotherapy of CWs. In conclusion, home treatment of CWs with the cryogenic pen, that should be always preceded by dermatologist diagnosis and prescription, is safe and effective, especially if combined with face-to-face and teledermatology consultations, pointing out its important role during pandemic times or in any other environmental limitations that may impair the access to medical care services. The combination of face-to-face consultations for initial and final visits and teledermatology during the treatment phase could represent a model for other dermatologic conditions as well (e.g., acne, rosacea, psoriasis, atopic eczema etc.).
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.