Hesen 2017.

Methods	Study design: 3‐arm RCT Conducted in Egypt Number of centres: 2 Recruitment period: unclear Funding source: unspecified
Participants	Inclusion criteria: both sexes, aged 25–60 years, with clinically and histologically confirmed erosive/atrophic OLP and free from any systemic disease Exclusion criteria: people with history of drug‐induced lichenoid lesions or potential treatment for OLP (for < 2 weeks by topical or 4 weeks by systemic therapy) before start of study; pregnant or breastfeeding women; smokers; known hypersensitivity or adverse effects to treatment drugs; losses of pliability or flexibility in tissues involved by oral lesions or histological signs of epithelial dysplasia or lichenoid lesions Group A: randomised 10; analysed 10 Group B: randomised 10; analysed 10 Group C: randomised 10; analysed 10
Interventions	Group A: topical triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% oral paste (GEO ORALOG; Geopharma, Cairo, Egypt) 4 times daily + glucosamine sulphate 500 mg capsules orally 3 times daily (glucosamine; GlaxoSmithKline, Cairo, Egypt) for 8 weeks Group B: topical triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% oral paste twice daily + glucosamine sulphate 500 mg 3 times daily for 8 weeks Group C: topical triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% oral paste alone 4 times daily for 8 weeks
Outcomes	Pain (VAS, resolution), clinical score (Thongprasom Classification score) Measured at baseline, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 12 weeks
Notes	We compared the outcomes of Group A and Group C as the triamcinolone daily dose was the same (4 times daily).
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "Patients were randomised into three groups (10 patients each) using computer‐generated randomisation assignment."
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "allocation concealment with sealed envelopes."
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Comment: insufficient information to permit judgement.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Comment: participants (self‐assessed, pain was primary outcome) were not blinded.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Comment: no missing data. All randomised participants included in result analysis.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Adverse effects, mentioned in the Methods were not reported in the Results.
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of bias identified.