Cargando…

Consensus for the Treatment of Tinea Pedis: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

Objective: To systematically review literature enabling the comparison of the efficacy of pharmaceutical treatments for tinea pedis in adults. Design: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with mycological cure as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes did include the clinical as...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ward, Harry, Parkes, Nicholas, Smith, Carolyn, Kluzek, Stefan, Pearson, Richard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9027577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35448582
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jof8040351
_version_ 1784691400691941376
author Ward, Harry
Parkes, Nicholas
Smith, Carolyn
Kluzek, Stefan
Pearson, Richard
author_facet Ward, Harry
Parkes, Nicholas
Smith, Carolyn
Kluzek, Stefan
Pearson, Richard
author_sort Ward, Harry
collection PubMed
description Objective: To systematically review literature enabling the comparison of the efficacy of pharmaceutical treatments for tinea pedis in adults. Design: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with mycological cure as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes did include the clinical assessment of resolving infection or symptoms, duration of treatment, adverse events, adherence, and recurrence. Eligibility Criteria: Study participants suffering from only tinea pedis that were treated with a pharmaceutical treatment. The study must have been conducted using an RCT study design and recording age of the participant > 16 years of age. Results: A total of seven studies met the inclusion criteria, involving 1042 participants. The likelihood of resolution in study participants treated with terbinafine was RR 3.9 (95% CI: 2.0–7.8) times those with a placebo. Similarly, the allylamine butenafine was effective by RR 5.3 (95% CI: 1.4–19.6) compared to a placebo. Butenafine was similarly efficacious to terbinafine RR 1.3 (95% CI: 0.4–4.4). Terbinafine was marginally more efficacious than itraconazole, RR 1.3 (95% CI: 1.1–1.5). Summary/Conclusion: Topical terbinafine and butenafine treatments of tinea pedis were more efficacious than placebo. Tableted terbinafine and itraconazole administered orally were efficacious in the drug treatment of tinea pedis fungal infection. We are concerned about how few studies were available that reported the baseline characteristics for each treatment arm and that did not suffer greater than 20% loss to follow-up. We would like to see improved reporting of clinical trials in academic literature. Registration name: Treatment’s for athlete’s foot—systematic review with meta-analysis [CRD42020162078].
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9027577
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90275772022-04-23 Consensus for the Treatment of Tinea Pedis: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials Ward, Harry Parkes, Nicholas Smith, Carolyn Kluzek, Stefan Pearson, Richard J Fungi (Basel) Systematic Review Objective: To systematically review literature enabling the comparison of the efficacy of pharmaceutical treatments for tinea pedis in adults. Design: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with mycological cure as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes did include the clinical assessment of resolving infection or symptoms, duration of treatment, adverse events, adherence, and recurrence. Eligibility Criteria: Study participants suffering from only tinea pedis that were treated with a pharmaceutical treatment. The study must have been conducted using an RCT study design and recording age of the participant > 16 years of age. Results: A total of seven studies met the inclusion criteria, involving 1042 participants. The likelihood of resolution in study participants treated with terbinafine was RR 3.9 (95% CI: 2.0–7.8) times those with a placebo. Similarly, the allylamine butenafine was effective by RR 5.3 (95% CI: 1.4–19.6) compared to a placebo. Butenafine was similarly efficacious to terbinafine RR 1.3 (95% CI: 0.4–4.4). Terbinafine was marginally more efficacious than itraconazole, RR 1.3 (95% CI: 1.1–1.5). Summary/Conclusion: Topical terbinafine and butenafine treatments of tinea pedis were more efficacious than placebo. Tableted terbinafine and itraconazole administered orally were efficacious in the drug treatment of tinea pedis fungal infection. We are concerned about how few studies were available that reported the baseline characteristics for each treatment arm and that did not suffer greater than 20% loss to follow-up. We would like to see improved reporting of clinical trials in academic literature. Registration name: Treatment’s for athlete’s foot—systematic review with meta-analysis [CRD42020162078]. MDPI 2022-03-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9027577/ /pubmed/35448582 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jof8040351 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Ward, Harry
Parkes, Nicholas
Smith, Carolyn
Kluzek, Stefan
Pearson, Richard
Consensus for the Treatment of Tinea Pedis: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials
title Consensus for the Treatment of Tinea Pedis: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials
title_full Consensus for the Treatment of Tinea Pedis: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Consensus for the Treatment of Tinea Pedis: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Consensus for the Treatment of Tinea Pedis: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials
title_short Consensus for the Treatment of Tinea Pedis: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials
title_sort consensus for the treatment of tinea pedis: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9027577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35448582
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jof8040351
work_keys_str_mv AT wardharry consensusforthetreatmentoftineapedisasystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT parkesnicholas consensusforthetreatmentoftineapedisasystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT smithcarolyn consensusforthetreatmentoftineapedisasystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT kluzekstefan consensusforthetreatmentoftineapedisasystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT pearsonrichard consensusforthetreatmentoftineapedisasystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrials