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


Journal

BMJ paediatrics open
ISSN: 2399-9772
Titre abrégé: BMJ Paediatr Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101715309

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2021
Historique:
received: 15 04 2021
revised: 22 04 2021
accepted: 24 04 2021
entrez: 27 5 2021
pubmed: 28 5 2021
medline: 28 5 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

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. 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. 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. CRD42017073375.

Sections du résumé

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.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34041368
doi: 10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001129
pii: bmjpo-2021-001129
pmc: PMC8112437
doi:

Substances chimiques

Permethrin 509F88P9SZ

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e001129

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: None declared.

Références

Australas J Dermatol. 2012 Nov;53(4):255-63
pubmed: 22758350
Nurs Forum. 2020 Apr;55(2):252-258
pubmed: 31919854
BMC Dermatol. 2013 Apr 01;13:5
pubmed: 23548062
J Invest Dermatol. 2014 Mar;134(3):628-634
pubmed: 24121401
BMJ. 1995 Sep 2;311(7005):604-8
pubmed: 7545045
Osong Public Health Res Perspect. 2015 Dec;6(6):346-56
pubmed: 26835244
Res Synth Methods. 2012 Jun;3(2):111-25
pubmed: 26062085
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 3;10:ED000142
pubmed: 31643080
Int J Dermatol. 1999 Apr;38(4):285-90
pubmed: 10321945
BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898
pubmed: 31462531
Infect Dis Poverty. 2018 Aug 6;7(1):74
pubmed: 30078380
Clin Infect Dis. 2003 Dec 1;37(11):1580-2
pubmed: 14614685
Pediatr Dermatol. 2020 Jan;37(1):86-92
pubmed: 31642120
Am J Ther. 2008 Jul-Aug;15(4):323-4
pubmed: 18645333
Int J Dermatol. 2013 Feb;52(2):169-71
pubmed: 23347303
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 03;8(10):e76654
pubmed: 24098547
Parasitol Res. 2012 Nov;111(5):1985-92
pubmed: 22847279
Mayo Clin Proc. 2004 May;79(5):661-6
pubmed: 15132409
J Sch Nurs. 2007 Oct;23(5):283-92
pubmed: 17894526
N Engl J Med. 2002 May 23;346(21):1645-50
pubmed: 12023998
J Pediatr Health Care. 1993 Mar-Apr;7(2):55-60
pubmed: 7684080
Emerg Infect Dis. 2008 Sep;14(9):1493-4
pubmed: 18760032
Dermatol Ther. 2009 Jul-Aug;22(4):273-8
pubmed: 19580574
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1991 Aug;25(2 Pt 1):248-51
pubmed: 1918461
J Sch Health. 1986 Apr;56(4):158-9
pubmed: 3515048
BMJ. 2020 Nov 11;371:m3900
pubmed: 33177059
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jun 2;162(11):777-84
pubmed: 26030634
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;(2):CD001165
pubmed: 11405977
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1
pubmed: 25554246
N Engl J Med. 2010 Mar 11;362(10):896-905
pubmed: 20220184
BMJ. 2014 Sep 24;349:g5630
pubmed: 25252733
Am J Clin Dermatol. 2011 Oct 1;12(5):349-53
pubmed: 21834600
N Engl J Med. 2012 Nov;367(18):1687-93
pubmed: 23113480
Pediatr Dermatol. 2010 Jan-Feb;27(1):19-24
pubmed: 20199404
Pediatrics. 2010 Aug;126(2):392-403
pubmed: 20660553
Res Synth Methods. 2012 Jun;3(2):98-110
pubmed: 26062084
Br J Dermatol. 1999 Sep;141(3):508-11
pubmed: 10583056
Parasitol Res. 2020 Oct;119(10):3125-3143
pubmed: 32803332
Int J Dermatol. 2013 Jan;52(1):106-12
pubmed: 23278618

Auteurs

Bill Stevenson (B)

Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Wubshet Tesfaye (W)

Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Julia Christenson (J)

Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Cynthia Mathew (C)

Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Solomon Abrha (S)

Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Gregory Peterson (G)

Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Pharmacy, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.

Indira Samarawickrema (I)

Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Jackson Thomas (J)

Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Articles similaires

Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice
Animals Tail Swine Behavior, Animal Animal Husbandry

Classifications MeSH