| Methods |
Study design: randomised controlled trial Setting/location: India Study period: not described Sample size calculation: not described |
|
| Participants |
Type of Leishmania:L major and tropica in the area Inclusion criteria: participants with localised CL. Demonstration of parasites from skin lesions by slit smear examination Exclusion criteria: women of child‐bearing age, children < 18 years old, participants suffering from any chronic illness, immunocompromised, prior therapy for CLs in any form, scars of healed leishmanial lesions, lesions of 4 months or more duration, participants showing abnormality in liver function tests N randomised: 20 Withdrawals: 0 N assessed: 20 (100%) Age: range 19‐62 years Sex: 15 males/5 females Baseline data: the duration of the lesions ranged from 2 weeks to 16 weeks, they were mainly seen on exposed parts of the body. 9 had a single lesion and 11 participants had a multiple lesion. |
|
| Interventions |
Type of interventions:
Duration of intervention: 6 weeks Duration of follow‐up: 3 months |
|
| Outcomes |
Primary outcome: percentage of participants 'cured' 3 months after treatment Secondary outcome: adverse effects Tertiary outcomes: microbiological or histopathological cure of skin lesions Time points reported: clinical response: day 15. Clinical and parasitological response: 6 weeks |
|
| Notes |
Study funding sources: none reported Possible conflicts of interest: none declared |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: "Patients were allocated randomly to receive capsules of itraconazole 100 mg or identical placebo". Comment: insufficient detail was reported about the method used to generate the allocation sequence. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: "Patients were allocated randomly to receive capsules of itraconazole 100 mg or identical placebo". Comment: no further information provided |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Quote: "double‐blind therapeutic trial" Comment: participants looks like blinded but no description about personnel blinding was provided |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Quote: "double‐blind therapeutic trial" Comment: participants looks like blinded but no description about assessment blinding was provided |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | No missing outcome data |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All relevant outcomes were reported |
| Other bias | High risk | Sample size calculation, reporting of Leishmania spp involved and baseline comparability was not correctly reported |