Lustosa Bruno Paulo Rodrigues, Haidamak Juciliane, Oishi Camila Yumi, Souza Ariela Both de, Lima Bruna Jacomel Favoreto de Souza, Reifur Larissa, Shimada Márcia Kiyoe, Vicente Vânia Aparecida, Aleixandre Maria Adela Valero, Klisiowicz Débora do Rocio
Universidade Federal do Paraná, Departamento de Patologia Básica, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Paraná, Departamento de Patologia Básica, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Microbiologia, Parasitologia e Patologia, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2020 Feb 7;62:e7. doi: 10.1590/S1678-9946202062007. eCollection 2020.
Most human epidemiological and clinical studies use visual inspection of the hair and scalp to diagnose Pediculus humanus capitis , however this method has low sensitivity to diagnose active infestations (presence of nymphs and adult lice). Vacuuming the hair and scalp has been used as a diagnostic method, but there are no previous data comparing its effectiveness with visual inspection. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of overall infestation (nits and trophic stages), of active infestation by Pediculus humanus capitis , and to evaluate the effectiveness of vacuuming in comparison with the visual inspection. Visual inspection was performed by three examiners and vacuuming of the scalp by one investigator, with an adapted vacuum cleaner. A total of 166 children aged 4 to 10 years old were randomly selected from public schools in Southern Brazil. Considering the positive results obtained by both methods, the prevalence of overall infestation was 63.3%, whereas active infestation was 18.7%. The visual inspection was more effective on diagnosing overall infestation, however, its effectiveness to detect active infestation was lower, ranging from 0.6% (RR=3%, p<0.001) to 6.6% (RR=35%, p=0.001), depending on the number of examiners. The effectiveness of vacuuming to diagnose active infestation was higher than the one of visual inspection, with a prevalence rate of 16.3% (RR=87%, p=0.332). As presented in our study, the vacuuming method was 2.74 to 7.87 times most likely to detect active infestation, thus it could be adopted as a more accurate method to diagnose active pediculosis.
大多数人类流行病学和临床研究使用肉眼检查头发和头皮来诊断头虱感染,然而这种方法诊断活跃感染(若虫和成年虱子的存在)的敏感性较低。用吸尘器吸头发和头皮已被用作一种诊断方法,但以前没有数据将其有效性与肉眼检查进行比较。本研究的目的是确定总体感染(虱卵和各发育阶段)的患病率、头虱的活跃感染率,并评估与肉眼检查相比,用吸尘器吸的有效性。由三名检查人员进行肉眼检查,由一名研究人员使用改装后的吸尘器吸头皮。从巴西南部的公立学校中随机挑选了166名4至10岁的儿童。考虑到两种方法都得到了阳性结果,总体感染的患病率为63.3%,而活跃感染率为18.7%。肉眼检查在诊断总体感染方面更有效,然而,其检测活跃感染的有效性较低,根据检查人员数量的不同,范围从0.6%(相对危险度=3%,p<0.001)到6.6%(相对危险度=35%,p=0.001)。用吸尘器吸诊断活跃感染的有效性高于肉眼检查,患病率为16.3%(相对危险度=87%,p=0.332)。如我们的研究所示,用吸尘器吸的方法检测活跃感染的可能性是肉眼检查的2.74至7.87倍,因此它可以作为一种更准确的方法来诊断活跃的头虱病。