Pathophysiology and management of sensitive skin: position paper from the special interest group on sensitive skin of the International Forum for the Study of Itch (IFSI)

The special interest group on sensitive skin of the International Forum for the Study of Itch previously defined sensitive skin as a syndrome defined by the occurrence of unpleasant sensations (stinging, burning, pain, pruritus and tingling sensations) in response to stimuli that normally should not provoke such sensations. This additional paper focuses on the pathophysiology and the management of sensitive skin. Sensitive skin is not an immunological disorder but is related to alterations of the skin nervous system. Skin barrier abnormalities are frequently associated, but there is no cause and direct relationship. Further studies are needed to better understand the pathophysiology of sensitive skin – as well as the inducing factors. Avoidance of possible triggering factors and the use of well-tolerated cosmetics, especially those containing inhibitors of unpleasant sensations, might be suggested for patients with sensitive skin. The role of psychosocial factors, such as stress or negative expectations, might be relevant for subgroups of patients. To date, there is no clinical trial supporting the use of topical or systemic drugs in sensitive skin. The published data are not sufficient to reach a consensus on sensitive skin management. In general, patients with sensitive skin require a personalized approach, taking into account various biomedical, neural and psychosocial factors affecting sensitive skin.     

A biography of Academician Zhicen Lou

A biography of Academician Zhicen Lou.     

Visumax飞秒激光辅助制瓣LASIK术中不透明气泡层及相关因素

目的：研究Visumax飞秒激光辅助的准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术（LASIK）术中不透明气泡层（OBL）产生的类型、相关影响因素及其临床意义。方法：回顾性分析。收集2016 年7 月1 日至8 月20 日在南京医科大学附属眼科医院行飞秒LASIK的患者154 例（300 眼）的临床资料，等效球镜度为（-5.88±1.51）D。飞秒激光采用Zeiss公司 Visumax飞秒激光仪，将术中产生的OBL分为瓣外OBL、瓣内快速OBL和瓣内慢速OBL。300 眼按角膜曲率平均K值分为A组（<42 D）、B组（42～46 D）和C组（>46 D）；按角膜瓣的厚度分为D组（100 μm）、E组（110 μm）和F组（120 μm）；按角膜厚度分为G组（<500 μm）、H组（500～540 μm）和I组（>540 μm）。统计不同角膜曲率、角膜瓣厚度、角膜厚度情况下3 种OBL产生的比例，并采用多元Logistic回归模型进行统计分析。结果：300 眼均发生OBL。以瓣外OBL作为参照，角膜瓣越薄，越容易出现瓣内快速OBL（r=-0.719，P=0.034）和瓣内慢速OBL（r=-0.875，P=0.044）。以瓣内慢速OBL作为参照，角膜曲率越高，越容易出现瓣内快速OBL（r=0.923，P=0.046）；角膜瓣越厚，越容易出现瓣外OBL（r=0.897，P=0.044）。结论：OBL的产生与角膜曲率、角膜瓣厚度、角膜厚度均存在一定的相关性，但瓣外OBL、瓣内快速OBL和瓣内慢速OBL对Visumax飞秒激光辅助的LASIK术后视觉质量的影响及远期疗效仍有待进一步观察研究。     

Quality of decision aids developed for women at average risk of breast cancer eligible for mammographic screening: Systematic review and assessment according to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument

Mammographic screening contributes to a reduction in specific mortality, but it has disadvantages. Decision aids are tools designed to support people's decisions. Because these aids influence patient choice, their quality is crucial. The objective of the current study was to conduct a systematic review of decision aids developed for women eligible for mammographic screening who have an average breast cancer risk and to assess the quality of these aids. The systematic review included articles published between January 1, 1997, and August 1, 2019, in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and PsycInfo databases. The studies were reviewed independently by 2 reviewers. Any study containing a decision aid for women eligible for mammographic screening with an average breast cancer risk was included. Two double-blind reviewers assessed the quality of the selected decision aids using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument, version 3 (IPDASi). Twenty-three decision aids were extracted. Classification of decision aid quality using the IPDASi demonstrated large variations among the decision aids (maximum IPDASi score, 188; mean ± SD score, 132.6 ± 23.8; range, 85-172). Three decision aids had high overall scores. The 3 best-rated dimensions were disclosure (maximum score, 8; mean score, 6.8), focusing on transparency; information (maximum score, 32; mean score, 26.1), focusing on the provision of sufficient details; and probabilities (maximum score, 32; mean score 25), focusing on the presentation of probabilities. The 3 lowest-rated dimensions were decision support technology evaluation (maximum score, 8; mean score, 4.3), focusing on the effectiveness of the decision aid; development (maximum score, 24; mean score, 12.6), evaluating the development process; and plain language (maximum score, 4; mean score, 1.9), assessing appropriateness for patients with low literacy. The results of this review identified 3 high-quality decision aids for breast cancer screening.