FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2795741587> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2795741587 abstract "Scabies is an intensely itchy parasitic infection of the skin. It occurs worldwide, but is particularly problematic in areas of poor sanitation, overcrowding, and social disruption. In recent years, permethrin and ivermectin have become the most relevant treatment options for scabies.To assess the efficacy and safety of topical permethrin and topical or systemic ivermectin for scabies in people of all ages.We searched the following databases up to 25 April 2017: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and IndMED. We searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the ISRCTN registry, CenterWatch Clinical Trials Listing, ClinicalTrials.gov, TrialsCentral, and the UK Department of Health National Research Register for ongoing trials. We also searched multiple sources for grey literature and checked reference lists of included studies for additional trials.We included randomized controlled trials that compared permethrin or ivermectin against each other for people with scabies of all ages and either sex.Two review authors independently screened the identified records, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias for the included trials.The primary outcome was complete clearance of scabies. Secondary outcomes were number of participants re-treated, number of participants with at least one adverse event, and number of participants withdrawn from study due to an adverse event.We summarized dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). If it was not possible to calculate the point estimate, we described the data qualitatively. Where appropriate, we calculated combined effect estimates using a random-effects model and assessed heterogeneity. We calculated numbers needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome when we found a difference.We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the control rate average to provide illustrative clearance rates in the comparison groups.Fifteen studies (1896 participants) comparing topical permethrin, systemic ivermectin, or topical ivermectin met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the risk of bias in the included trials was moderate: reporting in many studies was poor. Nearly all studies were conducted in South Asia or North Africa, where the disease is more common, and is associated with poverty.EfficacyOral ivermectin (at a standard dose of 200 μg/kg) may lead to slightly lower rates of complete clearance after one week compared to permethrin 5% cream. Using the average clearance rate of 65% in the trials with permethrin, the illustrative clearance with ivermectin is 43% (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.78; 613 participants, 6 studies; low-certainty evidence). However, by week two there may be little or no difference (illustrative clearance of permethrin 74% compared to ivermectin 68%; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.08; 459 participants, 5 studies; low-certainty evidence). Treatments with one to three doses of ivermectin or one to three applications of permethrin may lead to little or no difference in rates of complete clearance after four weeks' follow-up (illustrative cures with 1 to 3 applications of permethrin 93% and with 1 to 3 doses of ivermectin 86%; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; 581 participants, 5 studies; low-certainty evidence).After one week of treatment with oral ivermectin at a standard dose of 200 μg/kg or one application of permethrin 5% lotion, there is probably little or no difference in complete clearance rates (illustrative cure rates: permethrin 73%, ivermectin 68%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.17; 120 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). After two weeks of treatment, one dose of systemic ivermectin compared to one application of permethrin lotion may lead to similar complete clearance rates (extrapolated cure rates: 67% in both groups; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.29; 120 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence).There is probably little or no difference in rates of complete clearance between systemic ivermectin at standard dose and topical ivermectin 1% lotion four weeks after initiation of treatment (illustrative cure rates: oral ivermectin 97%, ivermectin lotion 96%; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03; 272 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Likewise, after four weeks, ivermectin lotion probably leads to little or no difference in rates of complete clearance when compared to permethrin cream (extrapolated cure rates: permethrin cream 94%, ivermectin lotion 96%; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; 210 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence), and there is little or no difference among systemic ivermectin in different doses (extrapolated cure rates: 2 doses 90%, 1 dose 87%; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; 80 participants, 1 study; high-certainty evidence).SafetyReporting of adverse events in the included studies was suboptimal. No withdrawals due to adverse events occurred in either the systemic ivermectin or the permethrin group (moderate-certainty evidence). Two weeks after treatment initiation, there is probably little or no difference in the proportion of participants treated with systemic ivermectin or permethrin cream who experienced at least one adverse event (55 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). After four weeks, ivermectin may lead to a slightly larger proportion of participants with at least one adverse event (extrapolated rates: permethrin 4%, ivermectin 5%; RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.83; 502 participants, 4 studies; low-certainty evidence).Adverse events in participants treated with topical ivermectin were rare and of mild intensity and comparable to those with systemic ivermectin. For this comparison, it is uncertain whether there is any difference in the number of participants with at least one adverse event (very low-certainty evidence). No withdrawals due to adverse events occurred (62 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence).It is uncertain whether topical ivermectin or permethrin differ in the number of participants with at least one adverse event (very low-certainty evidence). We found no studies comparing systemic ivermectin in different doses that assessed safety outcomes.We found that for the most part, there was no difference detected in the efficacy of permethrin compared to systemic or topical ivermectin. Overall, few and mild adverse events were reported. Our confidence in the effect estimates was mostly low to moderate. Poor reporting is a major limitation." @default.
• W2795741587 created "2018-04-13" @default.
• W2795741587 creator A5018785683 @default.
• W2795741587 creator A5040921378 @default.
• W2795741587 creator A5068888224 @default.
• W2795741587 date "2018-04-02" @default.
• W2795741587 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2795741587 title "Ivermectin and permethrin for treating scabies" @default.
• W2795741587 cites W1489375531 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W1497695040 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W1550895048 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W1883180077 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W189638959 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W1981680557 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W1988764701 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W1989122299 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W1997418568 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2000793810 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2007783562 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2009115068 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2009326492 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2018531484 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2018767908 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2019326191 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2019741988 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2027057456 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2032298145 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2033463049 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2054107021 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2071459110 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W207337915 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2073565601 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2075935587 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2078762536 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2079227416 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2089953642 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2090132603 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2091083230 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2093029790 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2093043874 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2095002867 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2096916191 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2107328434 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2109346853 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2110993585 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2122231026 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2123816234 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2125143899 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2131369225 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2140051040 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2148069252 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2173707956 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2317702186 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2331757043 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2437807999 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2441178929 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2546616813 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2551594619 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2625950130 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2713213633 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2759013423 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W2800434164 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W29110886 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W4211185704 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W4212955167 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W4233807531 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W4238107251 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W4365787296 @default.
• W2795741587 cites W66070437 @default.
• W2795741587 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd012994" @default.
• W2795741587 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6494415" @default.
• W2795741587 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29608022" @default.
• W2795741587 hasPublicationYear "2018" @default.
• W2795741587 type Work @default.
• W2795741587 sameAs 2795741587 @default.
• W2795741587 citedByCount "47" @default.
• W2795741587 countsByYear W27957415872018 @default.
• W2795741587 countsByYear W27957415872019 @default.
• W2795741587 countsByYear W27957415872020 @default.
• W2795741587 countsByYear W27957415872021 @default.
• W2795741587 countsByYear W27957415872022 @default.
• W2795741587 countsByYear W27957415872023 @default.
• W2795741587 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2795741587 hasAuthorship W2795741587A5018785683 @default.
• W2795741587 hasAuthorship W2795741587A5040921378 @default.
• W2795741587 hasAuthorship W2795741587A5068888224 @default.
• W2795741587 hasBestOaLocation W27957415872 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C16005928 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C161176658 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C187212893 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C197934379 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C2777499811 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C2779752676 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C2781443149 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C42972112 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C44249647 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C535046627 @default.
• W2795741587 hasConcept C6557445 @default.

• next