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

Comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for treating head lice: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Head lice infestation is a major public health problem around the globe. Its treatment is challenging due to product failures resulting from rapidly emerging resistance to existing treatments, incorrect treatment applications and misdiagnosis. Various head lice treatments with different mechanism of action have been developed and explored over the years, with limited report on systematic assessments of their efficacy and safety. This work aims to present a robust evidence summarising the interventions used in head lice.

Method

This is a systematic review and network meta-analysis which will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement for network meta-analyses. Selected databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials exploring head lice treatments. Searches will be limited to trials published in English from database inception till 2021. Grey literature will be identified through Open Grey, AHRQ, Grey Literature Report, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry. Additional studies will be sought from reference lists of included studies. Study screening, selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be undertaken by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved via a third reviewer. The primary outcome measure is the relative risk of cure at 7 and 14 days postinitial treatment. Secondary outcome measures may include adverse drug events, ovicidal activity, treatment compliance and acceptability, and reinfestation. Information from direct and indirect evidence will be used to generate the effect sizes (relative risk) to compare the efficacy and safety of individual head lice treatments against a common comparator (placebo and/or permethrin). Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations guideline for network meta-analysis. All quantitative analyses will be conducted using STATA V.16.

Discussion

The evidence generated from this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended for use in evidence-driven treatment of head lice infestations and will be instrumental in informing health professionals, public health practitioners and policy-makers.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42017073375.

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.

Treatment of pediculosis capitis: a critical appraisal of the current literature

Pediculosis capitis is the most common ectoparasitic disease in children in industrialized countries and extremely common in resource-poor communities of the developing world. The extensive use of pediculicides with a neurotoxic mode of action has led to the development and spread of resistant head lice populations all over the world. This triggered the development of compounds with other modes of action. The current literature on treatment approaches of head lice infestation was searched, and published randomized controlled trials were critically analyzed. The following compounds/family of compounds were identified: spinosad, a novel compound with a new neurotoxic mode of action, isopropyl myristate, 1,2-octanediol, ivermectin, plant-based products, and dimeticones. The efficacy and safety of these compounds are reviewed and recommendations for the treatment of pediculosis capitis in individuals as well as the interruption of ongoing epidemics are provided.