You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 117 No. 10, October 1981 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTIONS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Topical Clindamycin Formulations for the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris

An Evaluation

Michael W. McKenzie, PhD; David C. Beck, MD; Nicholas G. Popovich, PhD

Arch Dermatol. 1981;117(10):630-634.


Abstract

• This study evaluated the effectiveness of topically applied clindamycin hydrochloride and clindamycin phosphate in two, nonprescription, antiacne hydroalcoholic products for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Two percent concentrations of these clindamycin compounds were compared with the hydroalcoholic products in patients with moderate to severe acne who were attending a private dermatology office practice during a three-month period. Statistical analysis revealed a significantly greater clinical effectiveness for the clindamycin formulations compared with the hydroalcoholic products after eight weeks. The effectiveness of clindamycin compared with the hydroalcoholic products was not significantly greater after four and 12 weeks. The following are the possible reasons for this nonsignificant difference: a placebo effect within the first month, relative ineffectiveness of one type of clindamycin formulation tested, and the impressive clinical effectiveness of the antiacne hydroalcoholic products when combined with a consistent cleansing program.

(Arch Dermatol 1981;117:630-634)



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Pharmacy Practice, J. Hillis Miller Health Center, University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Gainesville (Dr McKenzie); and the Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Purdue University School of Pharmacy and Pharmacal Sciences, West Lafayette, Ind (Dr Popovich). Dr Beck is in private practice in West Lafayette, Ind.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Dec 17, 1980.

Reprints not available.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Topical v Systemic Agent Treatment for Papulopustular Acne: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis
Stern et al.
Arch Dermatol 1984;120:1571-1578.
ABSTRACT  

Topical Erythromycin v Clindamycin Therapy for Acne: A Multicenter, Double-blind Comparison
Shalita et al.
Arch Dermatol 1984;120:351-355.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1981 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.