Search

Background: Verrucae are a common foot skin pathology, which can in some cases persist for many years. Plantar verrucae can be unsightly and painful. There are a range of treatment options including needling., Objectives: The EVerT2 (Effective Verruca Treatments 2) trial aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the needling procedure for the treatment of plantar verrucae, relative to callus debridement., Methods: This single-centre randomized controlled trial recruited 60 participants (aged ≥ 18 years with a plantar verruca). Participants were randomized 1 : 1 to the intervention group (needling) or the control group (debridement of the overlying callus). The primary outcome was clearance of the index verruca at 12 weeks after randomization. Secondary outcomes included recurrence of the verruca, clearance of all verrucae, number of verrucae, size of the index verruca, pain and participant satisfaction at 12 and 24 weeks. A cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out from the National Health Service perspective over 12 weeks., Results: Sixty eligible patients were randomized (needling group n = 29, 48%; debridement group n = 31, 52%) and 53 were included in the primary analysis (needling n = 28, 97%; debridement n = 25, 81%). Clearance of the index verruca occurred in eight (15%) participants (needling n = 4, 14%; debridement n = 4, 16%; P = 0·86). The needling intervention costs were on average £14·33 (95% confidence interval 5·32-23·35) more per patient than for debridement., Conclusions: There is no evidence that the needling technique is more clinically or cost-effective than callus debridement. The results show a significant improvement in pain outcomes after needling compared with the debridement treatment alone., (© 2017 The Authors. British Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

Background: Callus is one of the most common foot skin complaints experienced by people of all ages. These painful and unsightly lesions often result in disability. The 'gold standard' of treatment is scalpel debridement by a trained specialist; however, people also seek over-the-counter remedies. There is a lack of clinical evidence for the efficacy of such products, which makes selection by patients and practitioners difficult., Methods: This randomised, three-armed, parallel, comparative trial aimed to test the efficacy of two home treatments for plantar callus using novel, objective outcome measures (skin hydration using the capacitance method; elasticity using negative pressure application; and surface texture using imaging). Additional outcome measures were: size of callus, quality of life (Foot Health Status Questionnaire) and self-reported participant satisfaction and compliance. The results were compared to a podiatry treatment. Participants were randomly allocated to one of three groups: potassium hydroxide (KOH, 40 %); trichloroacetic acid (TCA); and podiatry treatment. Participants were followed for 3 weeks after their initial intervention appointment (days 7, 14 and 21). The primary outcomes were the change from baseline in callus hydration, elasticity, texture, and size at each of the three time points. The secondary outcomes where: change in quality of life 21 days after treatment; resolution of calluses via visual inspection; and participant compliance and perception., Results: Forty-six participants (61 ft) with plantar calluses were recruited. The podiatry treatment showed immediate and significant changes in all objective outcomes, associated foot pain and function (p <0.01). Lesser changes in skin quality and perceived pain and functional benefits occurred with TCA and KOH over 21 days., Conclusions: This is the first study where objective outcome measures have been used to measure changes in the nature of skin in response to callus treatments. We found significant differences in plantar callus in response to podiatry and two home treatments. The podiatry treatment showed immediate and significant changes in skin and associated foot pain and function. Lesser, but sometimes comparable, changes in skin and perceived pain and functional benefits occurred with TCA and KOH over 21 days., Trial Registration: ISRCTN14751843 : date of registration: 30 April 2015.

Introduction: Verrucae are extremely common, and are experienced by most people at some time during their lives. Although most verrucae will spontaneously disappear without treatment, many patients seek treatment, often because they have persisted for many years, are unsightly or painful or prevent them from doing sports or other activities. There are many different treatments available; including the Falknor's needling procedure. To date, there has only been one small trial evaluating the clinical effectiveness of this treatment and no health economic analysis has been undertaken. The Effective Verruca Treatments (EVerT2) trial aims to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the needling procedure for the treatment of verrucae., Methods and Analysis: This single-centre randomised controlled trial will recruit 58 participants (aged 18 years and over with a plantar verruca) from Salford Podiatry Clinic patient lists and the surrounding area. If the participant presents with multiple verrucae, an 'index' verruca (largest and thickest lesion) will be identified and patients will be randomised 1:1 to the intervention group to receive the needling treatment or the control group to have the callus overlying the verruca debrided. The primary outcome is complete clearance of the index verruca at 12 weeks after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include clearance and recurrence of the treated verruca, clearance of all verrucae, number of verrucae remaining, change in size of the index verruca, pain, and participant satisfaction. A cost-effectiveness analysis of the needling versus callus debridement will be carried out from the perspective of health services over a time horizon of 12 weeks., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the University of Salford, Department of Health Sciences Ethical Approval Committee (HSCR15/24) and the University of York, Department of Health Sciences Research Governance Committee (HSRGC/2014/98/B). Findings will be disseminated through publication and conference presentations., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN16429440., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)