RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: While Skin Picking Disorder (SPD) is a well-described neuropsychiatric disorder that causes severe stress and impairment, there is no clear protocol for treating patients and a relatively small body of literature evaluating treatment approaches. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to summarize and compare recent publications and provide an up-to-date guide of current non-pharmacological treatments for SPD. METHODS: A literature review was conducted on all non-pharmacological SPD treatment studies published between 2017-2023 using PubMed, CINAHL Plus with Full text (EBSCO), and Scopus. Search terms included skin picking, excoriation, psychiatry, treatment, and psychodermatology. Studies including SPD within other body-focused repetitive behaviors (BFRBs), studies using pharmacological agents, and studies not available in English were excluded. A minimum of 2 authors screened each abstract while blinded to minimize bias to assess for inclusion. RESULTS: 11 studies (2068 participants) were included, with a variety of study designs including feasibility, randomized control trial, longitudinal cohort, multiple baseline experimental, naturalistic trial, and controlled single case design with multiple baseline studies. The treatments include cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), ACT-Enhanced Group Behavioral Therapy (AE-GBT), ACT-Informed Exposure Therapy, group therapy, psychotherapy, Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS), online self-help modules, and Expressive Writing (EW). Studies implementing CBT, Habit Reversal Therapy (HRT), AE-GBT, online self-help modules, and EW demonstrated the best results in treating SPD. CONCLUSION: Several studies achieved significant outcomes for SPD participants, confirming the usefulness of non-pharmacological treatment in SPD. Based on our results, CBT, AE-GBT, online self-help modules, and EW appear to be the most effective in treating SPD. Additionally, most of these treatment modalities can be tailored to meet patient-specific needs. Some limitations of the studies include small sample sizes, lack of control groups/randomization, limited long-term follow-up data, and lack of gender variability.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Several studies have investigated the independent effect of cigarette smoking or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on MASLD. However, the interaction effect between tobacco consumption and T2DM on MASLD severity remains underexplored. In this study, we assessed the combined effect of tobacco use and T2DM on hepatic fibrosis in MASLD. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective cross-sectional analysis of eligible participants from the Mass General Brigham Fibroscan© database. The participants were divided into 3 groups: those with T2DM and a history of tobacco use (primary exposure group), those with T2DM but no history of tobacco use (secondary exposure group), and those without T2DM and no history of tobacco use (reference group). An additional model was developed, which included a fourth group, participants with a history of tobacco use but no T2DM. The likelihood of fibrosis was determined using a defined fibrosis-4 index cutoff value of 1.3. In addition, we computed the estimated marginal means for liver stiffness measurement and compared the values among the exposure groups. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to explore the associations between the exposure groups and the risk for hepatic fibrosis. RESULTS: Overall, 598 individuals were enrolled in the study. The bivariable logistic regression model revealed a significant independent association between T2DM, combined smoking and T2DM, and the outcome of interest, fibrosis. Age, sex, metabolic syndrome, aspirin use, statin use, hemoglobin A1C (A1C), and total bilirubin level were also significantly associated with fibrosis. In the adjusted fibrosis-4 multivariable model (comparing exposure groups to controls), cigarette smoking and T2DM interaction had higher odds of prevalent fibrosis (aOR, 3.04; 95% CI, 1.62-5.76), compared to those with T2DM alone (aOR 2.28; 95% CI, 1.37-3.85). The continuous liver stiffness measurement comparison across the exposure group showed an estimated marginal means of 6.26 (95% CL: 5.58-6.94), 7.54 (95% CL: 6.78-8.30), and 7.88 (6.78-8.99) for the reference group, T2DM only group, and tobacco-T2DM group, respectively. The diabetes-only group and the combined tobacco-T2DM group had statistically significant associations with liver stiffness measurement (p values: 0.013 and 0.014, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although diabetes is independently associated with hepatic fibrosis in patients with MASLD, the combination of tobacco consumption and diabetes is associated with a higher prevalence of fibrosis. Therefore, lifestyle change through tobacco use cessation in patients with diabetes could be beneficial in reducing the incidence of liver fibrosis among individuals with MASLD.