...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Dermatology >A randomised, assessor blind, parallel group comparative efficacy trial of three products for the treatment of head lice in children - melaleuca oil and lavender oil, pyrethrins and piperonyl butoxide, and a
【24h】

A randomised, assessor blind, parallel group comparative efficacy trial of three products for the treatment of head lice in children - melaleuca oil and lavender oil, pyrethrins and piperonyl butoxide, and a

机译:一项用于治疗儿童头虱的三种产品的随机,评估盲人平行组比较疗效试验:千层草油和薰衣草油,除虫菊酯和胡椒基丁醇以及一种

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background There are many different types of pediculicides available OTC in Australia. In this study we compare the efficacy and safety of three topical pediculicides: a pediculicide containing melaleuca oil (tea tree oil) and lavender oil (TTO/LO); a head lice "suffocation" product; and a product containing pyrethrins and piperonyl butoxide (P/PB). Method This study was a randomised, assessor-blind, comparative, parallel study of 123 subjects with live head lice. The head lice products were applied according to the manufacturer's instructions (the TTO/LO product and the "suffocation" product were applied three times at weekly intervals according to manufacturers instructions (on Day 0, Day 7 and Day 14) and the P/PB product was applied twice according to manufacturers instructions (on Day 0 and Day 7)). The presence or absence of live lice one day following the last treatment was determined. Results The percentage of subjects who were louse-free one day after the last treatment with the product containing tea tree oil and lavender oil (41/42; 97.6%) and the head lice "suffocation" product (40/41, 97.6%) was significantly higher compared to the percentage of subjects who were louse-free one day after the last treatment with the product containing pyrethrins and piperonyl butoxide (10/40, 25.0%; adj. p Conclusion The high efficacy of the TTO/LO product and the head lice "suffocation" product offers an alternative to the pyrethrins-based product. Trial Registration The study was entered into the Australian/New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12610000179033.
机译:背景技术在澳大利亚,OTC有许多不同类型的除草剂。在这项研究中,我们比较了三种局部用除草剂的功效和安全性:一种含有美白菊油(茶树油)和薰衣草油(TTO / LO)的除草剂;头虱“窒息”产品;含有除虫菊酯和胡椒基丁醚(P / PB)的产品。方法:本研究是对123位有活头虱的受试者进行的随机,评估盲,比较,平行研究。根据制造商的说明使用头虱产品(TTO / LO产品和“窒息”产品根据制造商的说明(在第0天,第7天和第14天)每周一次间隔三次使用)根据制造商的说明(在第0天和第7天)将产品涂两次。确定最后一次治疗后一天是否有活虱。结果在最后一次治疗后一天使用含茶树油和熏衣草油的产品(41/42; 97.6%)和头虱“窒息”产品(40 / 41,97.6%)无虱的受试者百分比与使用含有除虫菊酯和胡椒基丁醚的产品最后一次治疗后一天没有虱子的受试者的百分比相比,显着更高(10 / 40,25.0%;调整)结论TTO / LO产品和头虱“窒息”产品替代了除虫菊酯类产品试验注册该研究已进入澳大利亚/新西兰临床试验注册中心ACTRN12610000179033。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号