A randomized, assessor-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase IV comparative trial of a suffocant compared with malathion in the treatment of head lice in children

Occlusive versus neurotoxic agents for topical treatment of head lice infestation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Topical occlusive agents, such as petroleum jelly and silicone oils, kill head lice by coating and blocking its excretory system and are unlikely to induce treatment resistance. Although a popular alternative to neurotoxic pediculicides, their efficacy and safety remain unclear.

METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, HERDIN (from inception to October 31, 2017), and other relevant sources for randomized controlled trials that compared topical occlusive agents with neurotoxic pediculicides to treat patients with head lice infestation. Using Cochrane collaboration methods, we selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and pooled similar studies. We assessed certainty of evidence using GRADEPro.

RESULTS

Seventeen trials (N = 2005) testing occlusive agents met inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was moderate across trials, mainly from lack of blinding of participants and personnel. As a class, occlusive agents may be more pediculicidal than neurotoxic agents (final cure rate, RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02, 1.41; 16 RCTs, N = 1779; I² = 88%; low certainty of evidence). Post hoc subgroup analysis suggests that this benefit may be limited to synthetic combination occlusive products. Adverse effects, such as skin and eye irritation, are similar between groups (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.36, 1.17; 15 RCTs, N = 1790; I² = 28%; low certainty of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

In treating head louse infestation, evidence suggests occlusive agents may be superior to or equally efficacious as neurotoxic pediculicides. Adverse effects are few and minor. Future trials should use appropriate comparators and consider effects of confounders such as neurotoxin resistance. Additionally, optimal occlusive formulation and dosing regimen need to be determined.

European guideline for the management of pediculosis pubis

Pediculosis pubis is caused by Phthirus pubis. The disease can be sexually transmitted. Patients main complain is of itch in the pubic area. The parasite can be spotted with the naked eye and blue macules can be observed in the pubic area. First line therapy consists of permethrin or pyrethrins with piperonyl butoxide. Second line therapy contains phenothrin, malathion and oral ivermectin. Partner management needs a look-back period of time of 3 months. Pubic lice incidence is increased in populations groups living in crowded spaces with scarce sanitary conditions as in time of war or disaster.

The efficacy of Australian essential oils for the treatment of head lice infestation in children: A randomised controlled trial

Background

The increase in resistance of head lice to neurotoxic pediculicides and public concern over their safety has led to an increase in alternative treatments, many of which are poorly researched or even untested.

Methods

A multicentre, randomised, assessor‐blind, parallel‐group trial (Trial 1) was conducted to compare the safety and efficacy of a head lice treatment containing Australian eucalyptus oil and Leptospermum petersonii (EO/LP solution; applied thrice with 7‐day intervals between applications) with a neurotoxic treatment containing pyrethrins and piperonyl butoxide (P/PB mousse; applied twice with a 7‐day interval) in children. A single‐blind, open trial (Trial 2) was conducted to assess the efficacy of EO/LP solution following a single application. In addition, skin irritancy and sensitisation tests using EO/LP solution were performed in adults and children. In vitro tests were performed to further assess the ovicidal and pediculicidal efficacy of EO/LP solution.

Results

EO/LP solution was found to be more than twice as effective in curing head lice infestation as P/PB mousse in per‐protocol participants (Trial 1; 83% vs 36%, P < 0.0001), and was also found to be 100% pediculicidal following a single application (Trial 2). Adverse events were limited to transient itching, burning or stinging. Further skin testing with the EO/LP solution reported no irritation or sensitisation in adults, or irritation in children. In vitro exposure of lice and eggs to the EO/LP solution resulted in 100% mortality.

Conclusion

The efficacy, safety and relative ease of use of the EO/LP solution make it a viable alternative in treating head lice.

Safety and efficacy of a non-pesticide-based head lice treatment: results of a randomised comparative trial in children

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Increasing resistance to pesticide-based head lice treatments has resulted in the need for alternative products to treat head lice infestations, but there are few clinical studies that have adequately tested these products. This multicentre, randomised, assessor-blind, parallel-group phase IV trial compared the safety and efficacy of a non-pesticide-based head lice shampoo with malathion foam in children.

METHODS

This trial used strict entry criteria, standardised treatment and assessment regimes, sibling control and a primary efficacy end-point defined as the absence of live head lice 21 days after initiating treatment. Repeat insult patch tests were performed to further assess the safety of the non-pesticide-based shampoo. In vitro tests were used to assess its ovicidal and pediculicidal efficacy.

RESULTS

A total of 216 children were enrolled, of whom 172 were per-protocol. The non-pesticide-based shampoo was significantly more effective than malathion foam for the intent-to-treat population (62.3 vs 40.4% louse-free, unadjusted P = 0.002; adjusted P = 0.003), as well as for the per-protocol population (67.8 vs 43.0% louse-free, unadjusted P = 0.001; adjusted P = 0.004). Adverse events were limited to itching or stinging. Patch testing with the non-pesticide-based shampoo resulted in no adverse reactions. In vitro tests using body lice demonstrated that the non-pesticide-based shampoo is ovicidal and pediculicidal.

CONCLUSION

The non-pesticide-based shampoo is significantly more effective in eliminating head lice than malathion foam in children, while being associated with a low incidence of mild, transient adverse events.