Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Heliyon logoLink to Heliyon
. 2023 Jun 19;9(6):e17219. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17219

Evaluation of resistance of human head lice to pyrethroid insecticides: A meta-analysis study

Ebrahim Abbasi a,b,∗, Salman Daliri d, Zahra Yazdani c, Shokrollah Mohseni a, Ghulamraza Mohammadyan a, Seyedeh Niloofar Seyed Hosseini c, Reza Nasiri Haghighi c
PMCID: PMC10319209  PMID: 37408932

Abstract

Introduction

Pediculosis is one of the most common annoying infections caused by parasitic lice in humans. Pyrethroids are one of the main insecticides used to treat this infection. But recently, due to the Resistance of lice to this group of insecticides, its insecticidal effects have been affected. The present study was conducted through a meta-analysis to investigate the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance against these insecticides worldwide.

Methods

This study was conducted as a meta-analysis of the prevalence of treatment resistance in human head lice against pyrethroid insecticides worldwide. Based on this, all articles published without a time limit until the end of June 2022 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science (ISI), Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were extracted and using random-effects meta-analysis model statistical methods in the meta-analysis, Cochrane, Index I2, and funnel plot were analyzed by STATA software.

Results

Twenty studies were included in the meta-analysis process. According to this, the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance insecticides in human head lice was estimated at 59% (CI95%: 50%–68%). Among pyrethroid insecticides, the highest prevalence of pyrethroid resistance against permethrin insecticide was 65%. Regarding the prevalence of Resistance by year, the prevalence before 2004 was estimated at 33%, but after 2015, this rate reached 82%. Also, the majority of pyrethroid resistance was estimated at 68% using genetic diagnosis methods and 43% using clinical diagnosis methods.

Conclusion

More than half of human head lice pyrethroid resistance insecticides. Based on this, it is recommended that before using this treatment method to treat human head lice Infestation, it should investigate the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance in that area, and if the majority of Resistance is high, alternative or combined treatment methods should be used.

Keywords: Human head lice, Resistance, Insecticides, Pyrethroid, Meta-analysis

1. Introduction

Pediculus humanus capitis or human head louse, is a parasitic insect caused by a hematophagous ectoparasite that lives in human hair and feeds on human blood. Infestation with Pediculus humanus capitis is often asymptomatic and not pathogenic for humans, but sometimes it causes skin irritation [1,2]. But the importance of this pollution is its widespread prevalence. In recent decades, most of the world’s countries in North America, South America, Australia, Europe, and Asia have been involved in this pollution, and its prevalence is increasing [[3], [4], [5], [6]]. As a result, controlling and preventing the spread of this Infestation is very important. The transmission of this Infestation is from person to person, so in case of contact with an infected person, especially in crowded places, it is transmitted to other people and causes them to become infected [7,8]. Treating infected people is one of the most critical approaches to preventing and controlling Pediculosis. Because when the source of infestation is controlled, the disease will no longer be transmitted. One of the most essential and standard treatment methods is using safe insecticides. Today, various insecticides are used worldwide to treat Pediculosis. Still, the most common insecticide group is Pyrethroids, sold and used under the trade names Permethrin, Phenothrin, and Pyrethrin [[9], [10], [11]]. This group of insecticides causes their death by disrupting the nervous system of lice. But recently, due to indiscriminate use and incomplete Treatment, lice have become resistant to this group of insecticides. Due to the lack of complete Treatment of the source of Infestation, its prevalence is increasing [[12], [13], [14]].

Studies show that permethrin’s effectiveness in treating Pediculosis has decreased from 97% and phenothrin from 75% to less than 15%. The subject indicates that using this insecticide group is ineffective [10,11,15]. In lice, there are different mechanisms for pyrethroid resistance against insecticides. The primary tool, especially against pyrethroid insecticides, is Resistance at the target site, created by point mutations. It makes the real targets of an insecticide less sensitive to the active ingredient [16]. This mutation in the voltage-sensitive sodium channel gene (Vssc) leads to Resistance in sodium channels [[17], [18], [19]]. By acting on sodium channels, pyrethroid insecticides interfere with the opening and closing of these channels, and this action leads to paralysis and, eventually, the death of lice. But when these mutations occur, the sensitivity of lice to insecticides is reduced, and the Treatment with them will be incomplete or ineffective [13,19,20]. As a result, it is essential to be aware of the prevalence of Resistance to insecticides to adopt the appropriate Treatment. There are various methods to detect the majority of Resistance in lice. The simplest way is to use insecticides to kill live lice and observe the proportion of live lice (clinical Method). The following Method uses molecular indicators to determine the presence of treatment-resistant genes in lice (genetically Method). In this Method, the gene mutation pyrethroid resistance and its ratio in lice are determined after extracting the genes in the laboratory environment. It includes Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), Quantitative Sequencing (QS), and Serial Invasive. Signal Amplification Reaction (SISAR) Protocol [17,21].

In general, it is necessary to be aware of the prevalence of treatment resistance in lice against pyrethroid insecticides to adopt the appropriate Treatment. Based on this, the present study was conducted to determine the prevalence of treatment resistance in human head lice against pyrethroid insecticides via systematic review and meta-analysis worldwide.

2. Material and methods

2.1. Protocol

The Preferred Reporting Items conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis study for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement [22]. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of Resistance to human head lice treatment against pyrethroid insecticides.

2.2. Search strategy and study selection

The search for articles on the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance of human head lice against pyrethroid insecticides was conducted in the scientific databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science (ISI), Scopus, and Google Scholar without a time limit until the end of June 2022. It used the collection of related keywords extracted from medical subject headings (MeSH), including head lice, human head lice, Pediculosis, Pediculosis capitis, Human Head Louse, Insecticide, Pediculicide, resistant, Pyrethroids, pyrethrins, permethrin, phenothrin, Treatment. These keywords were searched using AND and OR operators in singular and compound forms in titles, abstracts, and keywords. It also manually checked the reference lists of related articles for other possibly relevant articles not found through the electronic search strategy. Searching and extraction of articles were done independently by two trained authors in the field of searching articles in the medical information database.

2.3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria

All English language articles published in human head louse pyrethroid resistance, which investigated the pyrethroid resistance insecticides and the ratio of Resistance reported in them and were of good quality, were included in the study. Articles with low quality, studies conducted on other insects except for human head lice, non-reporting of quantitative pyrethroid resistance, reviews of other insecticides, qualitative studies, case reports, case series, reviews, and meta-analyses were excluded from the study.

2.4. Quality assessment

It used the Strobe checklist (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) to evaluate the quality of the articles [23]. This checklist has 22 sections in the fields of title, abstract, introduction, objectives, study method, Inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample size, study group, results, and limitations, which are scored based on the importance of each section. Be. The minimum and maximum scores obtained by this checklist are 15 and 33. In this study, the minimum acceptable score was 20 [24].

2.5. Data extraction

Two authors independently extracted the required information mentioned below from the articles: name of the author, year of study, place of study, sample size, type of insecticide used for Treatment, Method of detecting Resistance, and prevalence of Resistance.

According to the PRISMA flow chart (Fig. 1), 3451 studies were extracted during the search in scientific databases. Out of this number, it removed 824 studies due to repetition and from the remaining 2627 articles. After reviewing the title and abstract, it removed 2554 pieces due to a lack of relevance. Then it studied the full text of the remaining 72 articles. Of these, 52 articles were excluded for the following reasons: lack of investigation of pyrethroid insecticides (n = 34), failure to report the prevalence of treatment resistance (n = 15), and use of combined insecticides (n = 3). Finally, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria and underwent systematic review and meta-analysis.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

The PRISMA flow diagram.

2.6. Statistical analysis

Random-effects meta-analysis model with a 95% confidence interval was used to compare the prevalence of Resistance. Subgroups were analyzed based on the type of Treatment, diagnosis, Method, and year of study. The I2 test was used. In the results, 0%–25% heterogeneity was considered low, 25%–50% as a medium, and 50%–75% as high heterogeneity to evaluate the heterogeneity between the selected studies. Publication bias was assessed by Begg-Mazumdar and Egger tests. In addition, the subject performed a sensitivity analysis to determine the stability of the results. P-values above 0.05 indicate that the total variance is due to within-study conflict rather than between. Stata V.14 (Stata Corp.) was used for statistical analysis.

3. Result

Twenty studies conducted between 1991 and 2020 with a sample size of 24,651 human head lice were included in the meta-analysis process. The highest prevalence of human head lice resistance against pyrethroid insecticides was 99%, and the lowest majority was 5.4%. The characteristic of the reviewed articles is presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Characteristic of the articles included in the systematic review.

Author Place of study Year of Study Sample size Resistance Prevalence Quality assessment
Mumcuoglu KY [25] Israel 1991 50 21.2 Mild
Thomas D [26] United Kingdom 2006 316 5.4 High
Burgess IF [11] United Kingdom 2013 47 85.1 Mild
Kim HJ [21] USA 2004 27 56 Mild
Kasai SH [27] Japan 2009 630 9 High
Yoon KS [28] Netherlands and United States 2014 33 99 High
Bouvresse S [29] France 2012 670 98 High
Kasai SH [30] Japan 2009 282 9 Mild
Eremeeva ME [14] USA 2017 259 99 High
Yoon KS [31] North American 2014 480 99 High
Audino G [32] Argentina 2005 240 36 Mild
Gao JR [33] USA 2003 339 41 High
Firooziyan S [19] Iran 2017 2765 59 High
Durand R [34] France 2011 1551 93 High
Toloza AC [35] Argentina 2014 154 88 High
Roca-Acevedo G [36] Chile 2019 99 49 Mild
Ponce-Garcia G [37] Mexico 2017 468 62 High
Gellatly KJ [38] USA 2016 14,281 98 High
Karakuş M [39] Turkey 2020 1767 99 High
Chosidow O [40] New Zealand 1994 193 60 Mild
Open in a new tab

Based on the findings of the meta-analysis of 20 studies, the prevalence of Resistance to pyrethroid insecticides in human head lice was estimated at 59% (CI95%: 50%–68%) (Fig. 2). Among pyrethroid insecticides, the highest prevalence of pyrethroid resistance against permethrin insecticide was 65% (Fig. 3).

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Pooled prevalence rate of pyrethroid resistance human head lice against pyrethroid insecticides based on random-effects meta-analysis model. The midpoint of each line segment shows the prevalence estimate, the length of the line segment indicates the 95% confidence interval in each study, and the diamond mark illustrates the pooled Resistance prevalence.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Pooled prevalence rate of pyrethroid resistance human head lice based on the type of insecticide using a random-effects model.

They used molecular methods to detect pyrethroid resistance in human head lice. They also used the death rate of head lice after Treatment. Based on this, the meta-analysis results showed that in the studies that used the genetic diagnostic Method, the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance was 68%. In the studies that used the clinical Method (rate lice live after using insecticide), the majority of Resistance was 43%. In the studies that used both methods, the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance was estimated at 49% (Fig. 4). The studies were divided into three 10-year periods. It includes before 1383, from 1384 to 1394, and after 1394 Regarding the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance. Fig. 5 shows the findings of the meta-analysis of studies. The majority of treatment resistance was estimated before 2004 (33%), between 2005 and 2015 (68%), and after 2015 (82%).

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Pooled prevalence rate of pyrethroid resistance human head lice based on the Method for diagnosing Resistance using a random-effects model.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Open in a new tab

Pooled prevalence rate of pyrethroid resistance head lice treatment based on the year of the study using the random-effects model.

Funnel plot, Begg’s, and Egger’s tests were used to investigate the Publication bias. The symmetry of the articles in the funnel plot indicates that publication bias has not occurred (Fig. 6). Also, the results of Begg’s and Egger’s tests show no publication bias in this meta-analysis. The result of Begg’s test was Z = −0.39 and P = 0.75, and the development of Egger’s test was Z = 1.60 and P = 0.11.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Open in a new tab

Funnel plot of the prevalence of human head lice resistance.

4. Discussion

The present study’s findings showed that more than half of human head lice are resistant to pyrethroid insecticides, and the highest prevalence of Resistance to permethrin insecticide was observed. Also, the majority of pyrethroid resistance has increased during the past three decades, in the study by Larkin et al. (2020) [41] in Honduras, 93.9. (The statement needs to be short). In the study by Brownell et al. (2020) [42] in Thailand, 40%, and in the study of Roca Acevedo et al. (2019) [36] in Chile, 50% of head lice had a mutation in the T917I allele, which indicates pyrethroid resistance against pyrethroid. Ponce et al. (2017) reported in Mexico that 78.2% of the samples had a mutation in the T929I allele, which leads to pyrethroid resistance against pyrethroid insecticides [37]. In the study by Gellatly et al. (2016), 98.3% of the lice studied in the United States had an allele resistant to pyrethroid treatment [38]. Yoon et al. (2014) investigated the trend of Resistance for ten years in North America. Based on the findings, between 1999 and 2009, the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance of Pyrethroids was estimated at 84.4%. This proportion was reported as 97.1% in 2008 and 99.6% between 2007 and 2009, which indicates the increasing trend of treatment resistance [31]. In Mohammadi et al. in the metaanalysis study (2021), the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance in human head louse was estimated at 76.9%, which indicates that a high proportion of lice are resistant to permethrin [43]. Kasai et al. (2009) stated that Japan’s large head lice population is resistant to pyrethroid [27]. Cueto et al. (2008) reported Resistance to permethrin in embryos and lice eggs in Argentina [44]. In the study of Kristensen et al. (2006) in Denmark, the study of head lice showed that the genetic mutation of alleles T929I and L932 was present in them and caused Resistance to permethrin and Malathion [45]. Yoon et al. (2004) observed Resistance to permethrin and Malathion in head lice in California and Florida [46].

Gao et al. (2003) reported Resistance to permethrin caused by T929I and L932F alleles in California, Texas, and Florida [33]. Lee et al. (2000) registered Resistance to permethrin and Malathion in England [47]. Durand et al. (2014) in France, considering the high rate of head lice genotypic Resistance against pyrethroid insecticides, did not find its use effective for treating head lice and recommended alternative treatment methods [34]. Lebwohl et al. (2007), who investigated the Treatment of Pediculosis, considering the 12-day period for head lice to mature, recommended using pediculicides that do not have ovulatory properties (such as Pyrethroids). The Treatment should be carried out in 2 or 3 periods. Treatment with pediculicide against which there is genetic Resistance is ineffective [48]. Ebrahimi et al. (2021) in Iran identified three kdr point mutations in amino acids D820E, L840F, and N874G, corresponding to the replacement of aspartic acid to glutamic acid, leucine to phenylalanine, and asparagine in the human head louse population, which L840F was identified as a new mutation [49]. Ghavami et al. (2023) reported the presence of M815I, T917I and L920F mutations in 91.6, 4.2 and 4.2% of human head lice samples, respectively [50].

The survival of head lice after using insecticides can have various reasons, including the patient’s non-adherence to the treatment protocol and incorrect Treatment (low dose or incorrect use), lack of egg-laying properties, re-infestation, and Resistance against Treatment. Excessive pressure in the widespread and incomplete use of insecticides to control lice is the leading cause of increasing pyrethroid resistance in human head lice. Resistance to insecticides leads to an increase in the prevalence and chronicity of infestation in people, followed by the rise in treatment costs, the ineffectiveness of insecticides, the use of additional treatments, and an increase in possible toxicity and discomfort for infested people [51]. Based on this, choosing the suitable insecticide and the correct prescription and Treatment is essential in controlling the spread of human head lice and reducing the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance.

Different methods are used to determine the proportion of pyrethroid resistance in lice, which include: 1- Diagnosis of clinical Resistance, in the form of the balance of surviving lice one day after the use of insecticide, 2- Diagnosis of parasitic Resistance, in the form of evaluation of the resistance proportion of lice outside the human body to pediculicide compounds and 3- diagnosis of genetic Resistance, assessment in the form of evaluation of polymorphism in genes related to Resistance in lice. The present study’s findings showed that the prevalence of Resistance using genetic diagnostic methods was higher than the prevalence using the proportion of dead lice after using insecticides. One of the reasons for its decrease can be incorrect Treatment, such as low dose of insecticide or inaccurate use of medicine and lack of ovulatory properties. For genetic diagnosis, Karakuş et al. (2020) use the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method to screen the mutation of resistant alleles in lice, which requires small amounts of DNA for analysis and is easy to perform in a laboratory environment recommended [14,18,39]. Lee et al. recommended the Quantitative Sequencing (QS) method for screening the mutation of treatment-resistant alleles in head lice due to its speed, accuracy, simplicity, and widespread use [52]. Kim et al. in Argentina recommended using serial invasive signal amplification reaction (SISAR) protocol to screen and diagnose treatment resistance [21]. Although genetic methods are more accurate for diagnosing pyrethroid resistance, clinical practices are also suitable due to their availability, ease, and cheapness.

4.1. Limitations

The limitations of the present study include 1- the uncertainty of the type of insecticide used in some studies and 2- conducting studies in different years and countries, which may have different treatment approaches. 3- The existence of heterogeneity between studies.

5. Conclusion

The present study’s findings showed that more than half of human head lice are resistant to Treatment with pyrethroid insecticides. Based on this, widespread use without specific treatment resistance in infected areas is ineffective. Based on this, it is recommended that before using this treatment method to treat human head lice Infestation, it should investigate the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance in that area. Suppose the majority of Resistance is high. It should use alternative or combined treatment methods. Study systematically, and considering that it registered its search strategies in the Prospero system, it is easily repeatable. Its results can be feedback for evaluating human head lice control products and improving pediculosis control strategies.

Declaration

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

All the data obtained from this study are included in the text of the article.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Authors' contributions

EA determined the title, wrote and registered the protocol, and submitted the article. EA and SM extracted the files from the databases. ZY, SH, and RN, screening, and selection of final reports. GM and Abbasi, data extraction. SD wrote the article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Abbas Keshtkar, an academic staff member of the Tehran University of Medical Sciences, for his statistical and practical advice.

Contributor Information

Ebrahim Abbasi, Email: abbasie.ebrahim@gmail.com, e_abbasie@sums.ac.ir.

Salman Daliri, Email: salmandaliri@yahoo.com.

Zahra Yazdani, Email: zy20172017@yahoo.com.

Shokrollah Mohseni, Email: Mohseni57faryab@gmail.com.

Ghulamraza Mohammadyan, Email: gh.mohammadyan@gmail.com.

Seyedeh Niloofar Seyed Hosseini, Email: s.niloofar.hoseini@gmail.com.

Reza Nasiri Haghighi, Email: Nasiri392@yahoo.com.

References

  • 1.Rukke B.A., Birkemoe T., Soleng A., Lindstedt H.H., Ottesen P. Head lice prevalence among households in Norway: importance of spatial variables and individual and household characteristics. Parasitology. 2011;138(10):1296–1304. doi: 10.1017/S0031182011001004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Rukke B.A., Birkemoe T., Soleng A., Lindstedt H.H., Ottesen P. Head lice in Norwegian households: actions taken, costs and knowledge. PLoS One. 2012;7(2) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032686. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ismail M.T., Kabakibi M.M., Al-Kafri A. Epidemiology of pediculosis capitis among schoolchildren in Damascus, Syria. Indian J. Paediatr. Dermatol. 2018;19(4):331. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bartosik K., Buczek A., Zajac Z., Kulisz J. Head pediculosis in schoolchildren in the eastern region of the European Union. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 2015;22(4) doi: 10.5604/12321966.1185760. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Eremeeva M.E., Warang S.S., Anderson M.L., Capps D., Zohdy S., Durden L.A. Molecular survey for pathogens and markers of permethrin resistance in human head lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) from Madagascar. J. Parasitol. 2019;105(3):459–468. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Mendes G.G., Borges-Moroni R., Moroni F.T., Mendes J. Head lice in school children in Uberlândia, Minas Gerais State, Brazil. Revista de Patologia Tropical/J. Trop. Pathol. 2017;46(2):200–208. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Rukke B.A., Soleng A., Lindstedt H.H., Ottesen P., Birkemoe T. Socioeconomic status, family background and other key factors influence the management of head lice in Norway. Parasitol. Res. 2014;113(5):1847–1861. doi: 10.1007/s00436-014-3833-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Jahnke C., Bauer E., Feldmeier H. Pediculosis capita in childhood: epidemiological and socio-medical results from screening of school beginners. Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) 2008;70(11):667–673. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1100399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Verma P., Namdeo C. Treatment of pediculosis capitis. Indian J. Dermatol. 2015;60(3):238. doi: 10.4103/0019-5154.156339. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Feldmeier H. Treatment of pediculosis capitis: a critical appraisal of the current literature. Am. J. Clin. Dermatol. 2014;15(5):401–412. doi: 10.1007/s40257-014-0094-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Burgess I.F., Brunton E.R., Burgess N.A. Single application of 4% dimeticone liquid gel versus two applications of 1% permethrin creme rinse for treatment of head louse infestation: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Dermatol. 2013;13(1):1–7. doi: 10.1186/1471-5945-13-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Dong K., Du Y., Rinkevich F., Nomura Y., Xu P., Wang L., et al. Molecular biology of insect sodium channels and pyrethroid resistance. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2014;50:1–17. doi: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2014.03.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Rinkevich F.D., Du Y., Dong K. Diversity and convergence of sodium channel mutations involved in resistance to pyrethroids. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2013;106(3):93–100. doi: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2013.02.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Eremeeva M.E., Capps D., Winful E.B., Warang S.S., Braswell S.E., Tokarevich N.K., et al. Molecular markers of pesticide resistance and pathogens in human head lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) from rural Georgia, USA. J. Med. Entomol. 2017;54(4):1067–1072. doi: 10.1093/jme/tjx039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Willems S., Lapeere H., Haedens N., Pasteels I., Naeyaert J.-M., De Maeseneer J. The importance of socio-economic status and individual characteristics on the prevalence of head lice in schoolchildren. Eur. J. Dermatol. 2005;15(5):387–392. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Rivero A., Vezilier J., Weill M., Read A.F., Gandon S. Insecticide control of vector-borne diseases: when is insecticide resistance a problem? PLoS Pathog. 2010;6(8) doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1001000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Clark J.M. Permethrin resistance due to knockdown gene mutations is prevalent in human head louse populations. Open Dermatol. J. 2010;4(1) [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Fox K., Larkin K., Sanchez A. Global trends in genetic markers of pediculus humanus capitis resistance mechanisms. Curr. Trop. Med. Rep. 2020;7:65–73. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Firooziyan S., Sadaghianifar A., Taghilou B., Galavani H., Ghaffari E., Gholizadeh S. Identification of novel voltage-gated sodium channel mutations in human head and body lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) J. Med. Entomol. 2017;54(5):1337–1343. doi: 10.1093/jme/tjx107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Rinkevich F.D., Hedtke S.M., Leichter C.A., Harris S.A., Su C., Brady S.G., et al. Multiple origins of kdr-type resistance in the house fly, Musca domestica. PLoS One. 2012;7(12) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052761. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Kim H.J., Symington S.B., Lee S.H., Clark J.M. Serial invasive signal amplification reaction for genotyping permethrin-resistant (kdr-like) human head lice, Pediculus capitis. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2004;80(3):173–182. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Moher D., Shamseer L., Clarke M., Ghersi D., Liberati A., Petticrew M., et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 2015;4(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Von Elm E., Altman D.G., Egger M., Pocock S.J., Gøtzsche P.C., Vandenbroucke J.P., et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int. J. Surg. 2014;12(12):1495–1499. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Bazyar J., Safarpour H., Daliri S., Karimi A., Keykaleh M.S., Bazyar M. The prevalence of sexual violence during pregnancy in Iran and the world: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Inj. Violence Res. 2018;10(2):63. doi: 10.5249/jivr.v10i2.954. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Mumcuoglu K.Y., Miller J. The efficacy of pediculicides in Israel. Isr. J. Med. Sci. 1991;27:562–565. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Thomas D.R., McCarroll L., Roberts R., Karunaratne P., Roberts C., Casey D., et al. Surveillance of insecticide resistance in head lice using biochemical and molecular methods. Arch. Dis. Child. 2006;91(9):777–778. doi: 10.1136/adc.2005.091280. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Kasai S., Ishii N., Natsuaki M., Fukutomi H., Komagata O., Kobayashi M., et al. Prevalence of kdr-like mutations associated with pyrethroid resistance in human head louse populations in Japan. J. Med. Entomol. 2009;46(1):77–82. doi: 10.1603/033.046.0110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Yoon K.S., Gao J.-R., Lee S.H., Clark J.M., Brown L., Taplin D. Permethrin-resistant human head lice, Pediculus capitis, and their treatment. Arch. Dermatol. 2003;139(8):994–1000. doi: 10.1001/archderm.139.8.994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Bouvresse S., Berdjane Z., Durand R., Bouscaillou J., Izri A., Chosidow O. Permethrin and malathion resistance in head lice: results of ex vivo and molecular assays. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2012;67(6):1143–1150. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2012.04.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Kasai S., Ishii N., Natsuaki M., Fukutomi H., Komagata O., Kobayashi M., et al. ACS Publications; 2009. Monitoring of KDR-Mediated Pyrethroid Resistance in Head Louse Colonies in Japan. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Yoon K.S., Previte D.J., Hodgdon H.E., Poole B.C., Ho Kwon D., Abo El-Ghar G.E., et al. Knockdown resistance allele frequencies in North American head louse (Anoplura: Pediculidae) populations. J. Med. Entomol. 2014;51(2):450–457. doi: 10.1603/me13139. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Audino P.G., Barrios S., Vassena C., Cueto G.M., Zerba E., Picollo M.I. Increased monooxygenase activity associated with resistance to permethrin in Pediculus humanus capitis (Anoplura: Pediculidae) from Argentina. J. Med. Entomol. 2005;42(3):342–345. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Gao J.-R., Yoon K.S., Lee S.H., Takano-Lee M., Edman J.D., Meinking T.L., et al. Increased frequency of the T929I and L932F mutations associated with knockdown resistance in permethrin-resistant populations of the human head louse, Pediculus capitis, from California, Florida, and Texas. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2003;77(3):115–124. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Durand R., Bouvresse S., Andriantsoanirina V., Berdjane Z., Chosidow O., Izri A. High frequency of mutations associated with head lice pyrethroid resistance in schoolchildren from Bobigny, France. J. Med. Entomol. 2014;48(1):73–75. doi: 10.1603/me10115. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Toloza A.C., Ascunce M.S., Reed D., Picollo M.I. Geographical distribution of pyrethroid resistance allele frequency in head lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) from Argentina. J. Med. Entomol. 2014;51(1):139–144. doi: 10.1603/me13138. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Roca-Acevedo G., del Solar Kupfer C.P., Dressel Roa P., Toloza A.C. First determination of pyrethroid knockdown resistance alleles in human head lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) from Chile. J. Med. Entomol. 2019;56(6):1698–1703. doi: 10.1093/jme/tjz101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ponce-Garcia G., Villanueva-Segura K., Trujillo-Rodriguez G., Rodriguez-Sanchez I.P., Lopez-Monroy B., Flores A.E. First detection of the Kdr mutation T929I in head lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) in schoolchildren of the metropolitan area of Nuevo Leon and Yucatan, Mexico. J. Med. Entomol. 2017;54(4):1025–1030. doi: 10.1093/jme/tjx045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Gellatly K.J., Krim S., Palenchar D.J., Shepherd K., Yoon K.S., Rhodes C.J., et al. Expansion of the knockdown resistance frequency map for human head lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) in the United States using quantitative sequencing. J. Med. Entomol. 2016;53(3):653–659. doi: 10.1093/jme/tjw023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Karakuş M., Atıcı T., Karabela Ş.N., Baylan O., Limoncu M.E., Balcıoğlu İ.C. Detection of permethrin resistance and phylogenetic clustering of turkish head lice (Pediculus humanus capitis; De Geer, 1767 populations. Acta Trop. 2020;204 doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2020.105362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Chosidow O., Brue C., Chastang C., Bouvet E., Izri M., Rousset J., et al. Controlled study of malathion and d-phenothrin lotions for Pediculus humanus var capitis-infested schoolchildren. The Lancet. 1994;344(8939–8940):1724–1727. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)92884-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Larkin K., Rodriguez C.A., Jamani S., Fronza G., Roca-Acevedo G., Sanchez A., et al. First evidence of the mutations associated with pyrethroid resistance in head lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) from Honduras. Parasites Vectors. 2020;13(1):1–7. doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04183-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Brownell N., Sunantaraporn S., Phadungsaksawasdi K., Seatamanoch N., Kongdachalert S., Phumee A., et al. Presence of the knockdown resistance (kdr) mutations in the head lice (Pediculus humanus capitis) collected from primary school children of Thailand. PLoS Neglected Trop. Dis. 2020;14(12) doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Mohammadi J., Azizi K., Alipour H., Kalantari M., Bagheri M., Shahriari-Namadi M., et al. Frequency of pyrethroid resistance in human head louse treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Parasite. 2021;28 doi: 10.1051/parasite/2021083. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Cueto G.M., Zerba E.N., Picollo M.I. Evidence of pyrethroid resistance in eggs of Pediculus humanus capitis (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) from Argentina. J. Med. Entomol. 2008;45(4):693–697. doi: 10.1603/0022-2585(2008)45[693:eoprie]2.0.co;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Kristensen M., Knorr M., Rasmussen A.-M., Jespersen J.B. Survey of permethrin and malathion resistance in human head lice populations from Denmark. J. Med. Entomol. 2006;43(3):533–538. doi: 10.1603/0022-2585(2006)43[533:sopamr]2.0.co;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Yoon K.S., Gao J.-R., Lee S.H., Coles G.C., Meinking T.L., Taplin D., et al. Resistance and cross-resistance to insecticides in human head lice from Florida and California. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2004;80(3):192–201. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Lee S.H., Yoon K.-S., Williamson M.S., Goodson S.J., Takano-Lee M., Edman J.D., et al. Molecular analysis of kdr-like resistance in permethrin-resistant strains of head lice, Pediculus capitis. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2000;66(2):130–143. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Lebwohl M., Clark L., Levitt J. Therapy for head lice based on life cycle, resistance, and safety considerations. Pediatrics. 2007;119(5):965–974. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-3087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Ebrahimi S., Shahriari-Namadi M., Shahabi S., Moemenbellah-Fard M.D., Alipour H. Permethrin-associated kdr mutations through molecular analysis of human head lice (Phthiraptera: Pediculidae) populations in school children in the South of Iran. J. Health Sci. & Surveill. Syst. 2021;9(4):257–264. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Ghavami M.B., Panahi S., Nabati S.M., Ghanbari M., Taghiloo B. A comprehensive survey of permethrin resistance in human head louse populations from northwest Iran: ex vivo and molecular monitoring of knockdown resistance alleles. Parasites Vectors. 2023;16(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s13071-023-05652-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Durand R., Bouvresse S., Berdjane Z., Izri A., Chosidow O., Clark J. Insecticide resistance in head lice: clinical, parasitological and genetic aspects. Clin. Microbiol. Infection. 2012;18(4):338–344. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2012.03806.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Lee S.H., Clark J.M., Ahn Y.J., Lee W.-J., Yoon K.S., Kwon D.H., et al. Molecular mechanisms and monitoring of permethrin resistance in human head lice. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2010;97(2):109–114. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

All the data obtained from this study are included in the text of the article.

Articles from Heliyon are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES