You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


Advertisement

ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | RSS | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 123 No. 10, October 1987 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Online Only
 •  Online First Table of
Contents
  STUDIES
 •Online Features
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (15)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Delicious Add to Digg Add to Facebook Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Treatment of Pediculosis Pubis

Clinical Comparison of Efficacy and Tolerance of 1% Lindane Shampoo vs 1% Permethrin Creme Rinse

Debra Chester Kalter, MD; Jay Sperber, MA; Theodore Rosen, MD; Seth Matarasso, MD

Arch Dermatol. 1987;123(10):1315-1319.


Abstract



• Pediculosis pubis (PP) is a common sexually transmitted disease. Current therapy with 1% lindane or various synergized pyrethrins as a single dose has been accepted as adequate by the medical community. We treated 53 men with the diagnosis of PP with either 1% lindane (Kwell) shampoo for four minutes or 1% permethrin (Nix) creme rinse for ten minutes, according to random assignment. All patients combed with finetoothed combs immediately after therapy. They were examined for tolerance and efficacy at 24 to 48 hours and again at ten days (eight- to 12-day range). In the lindane group, ten (40%) of 25 subjects were infested at the final assessment. In the permethrin group, 12 (43%) of 28 subjects were infested at the final assessment. The difference was not statistically significant. Both treatments were well tolerated, with one mild adverse reaction in each group. We concluded that both agents were equivalent in the treatment of PP. On the basis of the high failure rate, we propose that the therapy of PP with any agent should include a second treatment at ten days.

(Arch Dermatol 1987;123:1315-1319)



Author Affiliations



From the Department of Dermatology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston. Dr Kalter is now with the St John's Hospital for Diseases of the Skin and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.


Footnotes



Accepted for publication March 17, 1987.

Reprints not available.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Pyrethrins and Pyrethroids in Dermatology
Taplin and Meinking
Arch Dermatol 1990;126:213-221.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | PHYSICIAN JOBS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1987 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.