Translate this page into:
Response by authors
Correspondence Address:
Vinod K Sharma
Department of Dermatology and Venereology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi - 110 029
India
How to cite this article: Tejasvi T, Sharma VK, Kaur J. Response by authors. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2007;73:351 |
Sir,
We appreciate the interest and response of Dr. C.R. Srinivas in our publication with regard to the determination of minimal erythema dose (MED) in narrowband UVB (NB-UVB). [1] The aim of our study was to standardize the MED with an objective parameter using Dermaspectrometer. We did not find statistically significant differences in the visual reading and Dermaspectrometer reading; however, the instrument can detect erythema, which may not be appreciated by eye and avoids subjective variation.
Most of the patients recruited in the study were females ( n=31 out of 41), and we could not find any variation in the MED between the genders. Probably, further studies with no gender bias and more number of subjects could provide a definite answer.
The recruited patients were tested for MED prior to the starting of the NB-UVB treatment, and we started at 70% of their respective MEDs and no patient complained of excessive burning. Hence, the reduction by 50mj from the obtained MED was not practiced by us. In situations where a patient complains of increased sensitivity, the usage of 50% of the MED has been suggested.
1. |
Tejasvi T, Sharma VK, Kaur J. Determination of minimal erythemal dose for narrow band-ultraviolet B radiation in north Indian patients: Comparison of visual and Dermaspectrometer readings. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2007;73:97-9.
[Google Scholar]
|
Fulltext Views
1,137
PDF downloads
944