ArticleCureus2022
Comparison of the Efficacy of Tap Water Iontophoresis Versus Aluminum Chloride Hexahydrate in the Treatment of Palmoplantar Hyperhidrosis.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07788326 (20% Alcohol With Steroid Local Anesthetic Technique Versus Steroid Local Anesthetic Technique Only in Stellate Ganglion Injection in Idiopathic Palmar Hyperhydrosis), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
20% Alcohol With Steroid Local Anesthetic Technique Versus Steroid Local Anesthetic Technique Only in Stellate Ganglion Injection in Idiopathic Palmar Hyperhydrosis: A Controlled Randomised Study.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hospital-Based Tap Water Iontophoresis for Primary Focal Hyperhidrosis: A Real-World Analysis of Treatment Adherence, Efficacy, and Relapse.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of tap water iontophoresis (TWI) versus aluminum chloride (AC) hexahydrate in the treatment of palmoplantar hyperhidrosis.
methodsThe study was a randomized control trial performed at the dermatology department of Pakistan Navy Station (PNS) Shifa Hospital, Karachi from March 2022 to September 2022. A total of 70 palmoplantar hyperhidrosis patients were included in the study after getting approval from the ethical committee. Patients were divided into two groups. Group A patients were treated with TWI three times a week for four weeks. Group B patients were treated with a 20% AC topical solution applied at night to the affected areas for four weeks. The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale (HDSS) score for both groups was calculated at baseline, one, two, three, and four weeks. The final response was labeled at four weeks by comparing mean HDSS reduction in both groups. SPSS version 28 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) was used for data analysis.
resultsMean HDSS was compared for both groups at the end of the study, which showed a significant reduction in the mean score from 3.40 ± 0.65 to 1.48 ± 0.78 in group A, as compared to a decline in scores in group B from 3.28 ± 0.67 to 2.14 ± 0.94 (p = 0.002). In group A, zero, one, two, and three points HDSS improvement was 2.9%, 25.7%, 48.6%, and 22.9%, respectively. Whereas in group B, it was 34.3%, 22.9%, 34.3%, and 8.6%, respectively (p = 0.001).
conclusionAs compared to AC topical solution, TWI is an effective, safe, and inexpensive management option for palmoplantar hyperhidrosis. It causes more improvement in HDSS scores and has lesser side effects.
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.