Future Research
This CPG highlights the need for further high-quality research (Table 6).
The British Journal of Dermatology. 2020;182(3):593-604. © 2020 Blackwell Publishing
M.T. Khan; M. O'Sullivan; B. Faitli; J.E. Mellerio; R. Fawkes; M. Wood; L.D. Hubbard; A.G. Harris; L. Iacobaccio; T. Vlahovic; L. James; L. Brains; M. Fitzpatrick; K. Mayre-Chilton
DisclosuresThe British Journal of Dermatology. 2020;182(3):593-604.
This CPG highlights the need for further high-quality research (Table 6).
The British Journal of Dermatology. 2020;182(3):593-604. © 2020 Blackwell Publishing
Primary types of EB | Blistering and scarring | Dystrophic nails | Hyperkeratosis, callus and corns | Pseudosyndactyly and mitten deformities |
---|---|---|---|---|
EB simplex | Yes | Yes | ||
Dominant dystrophic EB | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
Recessive dystrophic EB | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
Junctional EB | Yes | Yes | ||
Kindler syndrome | Yes | Yes |
Key recommendation | Grade strength of recommendation | Quality of evidence (rate average) | Key references a |
---|---|---|---|
Desirable consequences clearly outweigh undesirable consequences in most settings, and for this reason we recommend offering these options | |||
Avoidance of blistering and wounds: a podiatry education programme should be offered from birth, enabling carers, patients and staff to recognize and avoid causes of blistering and wounds, including • Footwear • Dressings • Foot biomechanics • Heat and sweating |
B | 2+ | 3–10 |
Management of dystrophic nails: podiatric support can include • Topical keratolytics • Trimming, reducing or removing nails |
B | 2+ | 3, 4, 8, 12–15 |
Management of hyperkeratosis (callus): podiatric support should include • Assessment and monitoring of weight distribution • Appropriate cushioning to prevent hyperkeratosis • Use of a validated assessment tool (Appendix S2) |
B | 2+ | 3–5, 7, 8, 10, 11 |
Footwear advice: information should be provided regarding suitable shoes and the appropriate use of • Insoles • Cushioning materials • Orthotics |
C | 3 | 3–5, 7–9, 21 |
Assessment and monitoring of mobility: podiatric care should focus on maintaining mobility, adapting to the specific needs of different subtypes and different age groups, within a multidisciplinary team | C | 3 | 3–9, 18–28 |
The balance between desirable and undesirable consequences was uncertain, and for this reason we suggest consideration of this option | |||
Assessment of pseudosyndactyly and contractures: podiatric support should include • Advice on preventative measures • Assessment of functional impairment • Referral for surgical correction • Postoperative management to prevent recurrence and promote mobility |
D | 3 | 22, 29–34 |
a Reference 10 contained no EB population.
Grade | |
---|---|
B | A body of evidence including studies rated as 2++, directly applicable to the target population, and demonstrating overall consistency of results; or extrapolated evidence from studies rated as 1++ or 1+ |
C | A body of evidence including studies rated as 2+, directly applicable to the target population and demonstrating overall consistency of results; or extrapolated evidence from studies rated as 2++ |
D | Evidence level 3 or 4; or extrapolated evidence from studies rated as 2+ |
Rate | |
2++ | High-quality systematic reviews of case–control or cohort studies; high-quality case–control or cohort studies with a very low risk of confounding or bias and a high probability that the relationship is causal |
2+ | Well-conducted case–control or cohort studies with a low risk of confounding or bias and a moderate probability that the relationship is causal |
3 | Nonanalytical studies, e.g. case reports or case series |
✓ | Recommended best practice based on the clinical experience of the guideline development group36 |
Descriptions are in accordance with SIGN.36 Note that there was no disagreement on the quality of the appraised articles or the strength of the recommendations.
Walking | EBS | JEB | DDEB | RDEB |
---|---|---|---|---|
Independent | 31·2 | 30·8 | 66·7 | 24·4 |
Dependent | 2·1 | 7·7 | 0 | 13·3 |
EBS, EB simplex; JEB, junctional EB; DDEB, dominant dystrophic EB; RDEB, recessive dystrophic EB.
Outcome | Allocated papers | Participants with EB in the articles | Methodology | Average quality rateb | Quality appraisal (range) | Benefits and limitations |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Blistering and wound management | 6 | 347a | 1 qualitative | 2+ | 58% (52–86%) | Blisters can be reduced in size and frequency, but expertise still limited to a few centres |
EBS 171 | 1 quantitative | |||||
JEB 11 | 1 cohort | |||||
DDEB 31 | 2 case studies | |||||
RDEB 22 | 1 chapter | |||||
Dystrophic nails | 8 | 234a | 2 qualitative | 2+ | 67% (17–90%) | Mainly toenails rather than fingernails and their use for diagnosis |
EBS 137 | 1 quantitative | |||||
JEB 11 | 3 case studies | |||||
DDEB 38 | 1 observational | |||||
RDEB 24 | 1 chapter | |||||
Hyperkeratosis | 5 | 286a | 1 qualitative | 2+ | 58% (52–64%) | Highlights occurrence in clinic, not complexity |
EBS 137 | 1 quantitative | |||||
JEB 11 | 2 case studies | |||||
DDEB 33 | 1 chapter | |||||
RDEB 22 | ||||||
Footwear | 6 | 291a | 1 qualitative | 3 | 56% (48–69%) | Mainly on advice, no audits |
EBS 114 | 1 quantitative | |||||
JEB 11 | 1 cohort | |||||
DDEB 31 | 2 case studies | |||||
RDEB 22 | 1 chapter | |||||
Mobility | 14 | 1067a | 3 qualitative | 3 | 60% (48–90%) | Early stages of new approaches to assess and treat |
EBS 396 | 2 quantitative | |||||
JEB 71 | 1 cohort | |||||
DDEB 148 | 3 observational | |||||
RDEB 105 | 4 case studies | |||||
1 chapter | ||||||
Pseudosyndactyly | 8 | 3401a | Out of 96 cases of DEB only 7 were on toe fusion | 3 | 54% (24–95%) | Low evidence with only case reports or series of poor quality and high risk of bias |
DEB 96 | 1 laboratory biological and animal model |
EB, epidermolysis bullosa; EBS, EB simplex; JEB, junctional EB; DDEB, dominant dystrophic EB; RDEB, recessive dystrophic EB. aTotal number of persons with EB in all papers combined. bDescriptions in accordance with SIGN:36 2+, well-conducted case–control or cohort studies with a low risk of confounding or bias and a moderate probability that the relationship is causal; 3, nonanalytical studies, e.g. case reports or case series.
Blistering and wound management • Comparative studies can be used to assess dressing types used on the feet in different EB groups |
Dystrophic nails • Evaluate the benefit of a podiatrist to manage both fingernails and toenails • A review of the nail conditions affecting patients with EB is needed, and then a study to examine the treatment protocols, with topical keratolytic agents, urea-based agents and daily filing with an emollient to follow |
Hyperkeratosis (callus) • Evaluate the benefits of callus debridement between manual techniques (scalpel) over keratolytic agents • Comparative studies to assess different keratolytic agents when treating hyperkeratosis in patients with EB |
Footwear • Examine different podiatry materials to offer shock absorption and redistribution within footwear being worn • Studies on footwear for patients with EB and engagement with footwear and hosiery manufacturers to make friendly footwear and hosiery more accessible for a person with EB • Evaluate specific footwear funding by the service for 'suitable' patients; the outcome of this would be useful • A study would be required to show any quantifiable benefit of silver vinyl insole material |
Mobility • Further assessment with larger EB groups, monitoring mobility using gait analysis platforms and fitness trackers to assess total distances achieved. • Patients can record their steps just using their mobile phones; this is not as accurate as a fitness tracker but it is less expensive, and noteveryone can wear something around their wrist • Assessing the impact that aids, suitable footwear, insoles and orthotics, and dressings have on aiding distances achieved by individuals with EB |
Pseudosyndactyly • Benefit of no surgical implementation of losartan in slowing down fibrosis in patients with RDEB |
Other areas • Botox injections in EBS • Pedagogical implications for the contextual positioning of EB education and training in both undergraduate and continuous professional development and postgraduate podiatric specialisms |
EB, epidermolysis bullosa; EBS, EB simplex; RDEB, recessive dystrophic EB.
Disclaimer: Podiatrists are sometimes asked to deal with fingernails as well as toenails by their EB consultant. Podiatrists should ensure that this activity is within the scope of the podiatric practice act for their country and find out whether certification is required. |
M.T. Khan1–4, M. O'Sullivan5,6, B. Faitli1, J.E. Mellerio1,7,8, R. Fawkes8, M. Wood1, L.D. Hubbard7, A.G. Harris3,9, L. Iacobaccio10, T. Vlahovic11, L. James5,6, L. Brains12, M. Fitzpatrick12,13 and K. Mayre-Chilton7,13
1EB Department, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children, London, U.K.
2Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine, UCLH, London, U.K.
3St George Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
4Barts and The London NHS Foundation Trust, London, U.K.
5University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Solihull Hospital, Solihull, U.K.
6Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Podiatry Birmingham, Birmingham, U.K.
7St Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7EH, U.K.
8St John's Institute of Dermatology, Rare Diseases Centre, London, U.K.
9Department of Dermatology, Concord Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
10The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
11Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A.
12DEBRA Australia Member and Volunteer, Pittsworth, QLD, Australia
13DEBRA International, Vienna, Austria
Correspondence
Mohammed Tariq Khan. E-mail: tariq.khan9@nhs.net
Conflicts of interest
Marigold Footcare Limited is family owned by one author (M.T.K.); however, M.T.K. does not have any financial interests and acts as a company consultant on an honorary basis. M.T.K., R.F. and M.W. are consultants for a project called REBOOT but have no financial interests in any shoe supplier or distributor; and K.M.-C. is an associate to DEBRA International. M.W. and K.M.-C. were therefore not involved in the final editions of the recommendation manuscript, editions post-review or panel feedback. The reviewers declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the publication of this guideline.
You have already selected for My Alerts
Click the topic below to receive emails when new articles are available.
You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive email when new content is published.
Manage Email Alertsprocessing....