Efficacy of Whole-Body versus Lesional Application of Permethrin Cream for Scabies Treatment: A Quasi-Experimental Study
Objective: The study aims to evaluate the efficacy of whole-body versus lesional application of 5% permethrin cream for scabies eradication.
Design: This quasi-experimental study was conducted on September-October 2018 at boarding schools in Bogor and East Jakarta, Indonesia. Subjects were randomized into two groups, 51 students each.
Interventions: The first group received a whole-body application while the second group received lesional application of 5% permethrin cream. Evaluation was performed after 7 and 28 days.
Main outcome measures: Proportion of lesions cured following the intervention
Results: The prevalence of scabies was 41% and 33% at the boarding schools in Bogor and East Jakarta, respectively. Subjects from both groups had similar lesion distributions at baseline (p>0.05). Following intervention, the number of lesions reduced significantly (p<0.001) and both treatments were equally effective in treating scabies with 84.6% vs 91.5% cure rate [Relative Risk (RR) 1.8(0.6-5.0); p>0.05].
Conclusion: Lesional application of 5% permethrin is proven to be equally effective in treating scabies with higher cure rate. This method shows advantage for scabies treatment. In addition to reduce the unwanted side effects, it is more cost-effective and convenient. Further studies with larger sample size and randomized controlled trial design are warranted.
Keywords: scabies, permethrin, whole-body application, lesional application, cure rate
2. Susilo RA. The association between the prevalence of scabies and the personal hygiene of the students in Islamic Boarding School X in East Jakarta [thesis]. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia; 2014.
3. Sianturi I, Sungkar S. The relationship between hygienic practices towards scabies infestation in a boarding school of East Jakarta. eJKI. 2014; 2:357-41.
4. Romani L, Koroivueta J, Steer Ac, Kama M, Kaldor Jm, Wand H, et al. Scabies and impetigo prevalence and risk factors in Fiji. Plos Negl Trop Dis. 2015; 9:E452.
5. Sungkar S, Agustin T, Menaldi SL, Fuady H, Herqutanto, Angkasa H, et al. Effectiveness of permethrin standard and modified methods in scabies treatment. Med J Indonesia. 2014; 23:93-8.
6. Manjhi PK, Sinha RI, Kumar M, Sinha KI. Comparative study of efficacy of oral ivermectin versus some topical antiscabies drugs in the treatment of scabies. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014; 8:1-4.
7. Sungkar S. Skabies. Jakarta: Badan Penerbit FKUI; 2016.
8. Karimkhani C, Colombara DV, Drucker AM, Norton SA, Hay R, Engelman D, et al. The global burden of scabies: a cross-sectional analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017; 17:1247-54.
9. Kouotou EA, Nansseu JRN, Kouawa MK, Bissek ACZK. Prevalence and drivers of human scabies among children and adolescents living and studying in Cameroonian boarding schools. Parasite & Vectors. 2016; 9:400.
10. Scabies: management [Internet]. UpToDate: Wolters Kluwer. 2018. Available from: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/scabies-management
11. Ranjkesh MR, Naghili B, Goldust M, Rezaee E. The efficacy of 5% permethrin vs oral ivermectin for the treatment of scabies. Annals of Parasitol. 2013; 59:189-94.
12. Rosumeck S, Nast A, Dressler C. Ivermectin and permethrin for treating scabies. Cochrane database of Syst Rev. 2018;4. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012994
13. Karthikeyan K. Treatment of scabies: newer perspectives. Postgrad Med J. 2005;81:7-11
14. Chhaiya SB, Patel VJ, Dave JN, Mehta DS, Shah HA. Comparative efficacy and safety of topical permethrin, topical ivermectin, and oral ivermectin, in patients of uncomplicated scabies. IJDVL. 2012; 78:605-10.
15. Mila-Kierzenkowska C, Wozniak A, Krzyzynska-Malinowska E, Kaluzna L, Wesolowski R, Pocwiardowski W, et al. Comparative efficacy of topical permethrin, crotamiton, and sulfur ointment in treatment of scabies. J Arthropod-Borne Dis. 2017; 11:1-9.
16. Dressler C, Rosumeck S, Sunderkotter C, Werner RN, Nast A. The treatment of scabies: a systematic review of randomized controlled trial. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2016; 113:757-62.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).