Comparative Efficacy of 10% Potassium Hydroxide Solution Versus Cryotherapy in Molluscum Contagiosum
Comparison of 10% Potassium Hydroxide Solution Versus Cryotherapy in the Treatment of Molluscum Contagiosum
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Phase 1
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
-
Abbottābād, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
- CMH Abbottabad
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Child
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- clinical diagnosis of molluscum contagiosum having 3-20 lesion
- no history of treatment before
- willingness to participate (given by parents)
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients with facial lesions
- known immunodeficiency
- tendency for hypertrophic scarring
- known hypersensitivity
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Group A received cryotherapy
Group A were subjected to weekly cryotherapy with a cotton stick dip ped in Liquid Nitrogen for 02 Freezes and Thaw Cycle of 07 seconds with each cycle 10 seconds apart for 3 weeks
|
Group A were subjected to weekly cryotherapy with a cotton stick dip ped in Liquid Nitrogen for 02 Freezes and Thaw Cycle of 07 seconds with each cycle 10 seconds apart for 3 weeks
|
|
Active Comparator: Group B received 10% Potassium Hydroxide Solution
Group B applied 10% Potassium Hydroxide solution twice daily with the help of a cotton tip applicator until lesion showed signs of inflammation or clearance for 3 weeks
|
Group B applied 10% potassium hydroxide aqueous solution twice daily with the help of a cotton tip applicator until lesion showed signs of inflammation or clearance for 3 weeks
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Efficacy was assessed at 12th week by the clearance of lesion or not
Time Frame: 12 weeks
|
Final evaluation in terms of efficacy was done at the follow up visit in 12th week and the method was termed as effective (Yes) on achieving complete clearance of lesions confirmed on clinical & physical examination of the affected areas by a consultant dermatologist using dermoscopy showing complete resolution of lesions.
However, if lesions were not completely cleared at the end of 12th week, the treatment method was labelled as ineffective (No).
|
12 weeks
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- CMHAbbottabad22
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.