Tungiasis (sand flea disease) is a neglected tropical disease, prevalent in resource-poor communities in South America and sub-Saharan Africa. It is caused by an inflammatory response against penetrated female sand fleas (Tunga penetrans) embedded in the skin of the host. Although associated with debilitating acute and chronic morbidity, there is no proven effective drug treatment. By consequence patients attempt to remove embedded sand fleas with non-sterile sharp instruments, such as safety pins, a procedure that represents a health threat by itself. In this proof-of-principle study we compared the topical application of a mixture of two dimeticones of low viscosity (NYDA) to the topical application of a 0.05% solution of KMnO4 in 47 school children in an endemic area in rural Kenya. The efficacy of the treatment was assessed during a follow up period of seven days using viability signs of the embedded parasites, alterations in the natural development of lesion morphology and the degree of local inflammation as outcome measures. Seven days after treatment, in the dimeticone group 78% (95% CI 67–86%) of the parasites had lost all signs of viability as compared to 39% (95% CI 28–52%) in the KMnO4 group (p<0.001). In the dimeticone group 90% (95% CI 80–95%) of the penetrated sand fleas showed an abnormal development already after 5 days, compared to 53% (95% CI 40–66%; p<0.001) in the KMnO4 group. Seven days after treatment, signs of local skin inflammation had significantly decreased in the dimeticone group (p<0.001). This study identified the topical application of dimeticones of low viscosity (NYDA) as an effective means to kill embedded sand fleas. In view of the efficacy and safety of the topical treatment with dimeticone, the mechanical extraction of embedded sand fleas using hazardous instruments is no longer warranted.

Background School attendance during the COVID-19 pandemic is intensely debated. Aim In November 2020, we assessed SARS-CoV-2 infections and seroreactivity in 24 randomly selected school classes and connected households in Berlin, Germany. Methods We collected oro-nasopharyngeal swabs and blood samples, examining SARS-CoV-2 infection and IgG antibodies by RT-PCR and ELISA. Household members self-swabbed. We assessed individual and institutional prevention measures. Classes with SARS-CoV-2 infection and connected households were retested after 1 week. Results We examined 1,119 participants, including 177 primary and 175 secondary school students, 142 staff and 625 household members. SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred in eight classes, affecting each 1–2 individuals. Infection prevalence was 2.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2–5.0; 9/338), 1.4% (95% CI: 0.2–5.1; 2/140), and 2.3% (95% CI: 1.3–3.8; 14/611) among students, staff and household members. Six of nine infected students were asymptomatic at testing. We detected IgG antibodies in 2.0% (95%CI: 0.8–4.1; 7/347), 1.4% (95% CI: 0.2–5.0; 2/141) and 1.4% (95% CI: 0.6–2.7; 8/576). Prevalence increased with inconsistent facemask-use in school, walking to school, and case-contacts outside school. For three of nine households with infection(s), origin in school seemed possible. After 1 week, no school-related secondary infections appeared in affected classes; the attack rate in connected households was 1.1%. Conclusion School attendance under rigorously implemented preventive measures seems reasonable. Balancing risks and benefits of school closures need to consider possible spill-over infection into households. Deeper insight is required into the infection risks due to being a schoolchild vs attending school.

BackgroundTungiasis, a parasitic skin disease caused by the female sand flea Tunga penetrans, is a prevalent condition in impoverished communities in the tropics. In this setting, the ectoparasitosis is associated with important morbidity. It causes disfigurement and mutilation of the feet. Feasible and effective treatment is not available. So far prevention is the only means to control tungiasis-associated morbidity.MethodologyIn two villages in Central Madagascar, we assessed the efficacy of the availability of closed shoes and the twice-daily application of a plant-based repellent active against sand fleas (Zanzarin) in comparison to a control group without intervention. The study population was randomized into three groups: shoe group, repellent group and control group and monitored for ten weeks. The intensity of infestation, the attack rate and the severity of tungiasis-associated morbidity were assessed every two weeks.FindingsIn the repellent group, the median attack rate became zero already after two weeks. The intensity of the infestation decreased constantly during the observation period and tungiasis-associated morbidity was lowered to an insignificant level. In the shoe group, only a marginal decrease in the intensity of infestation and in the attack rate was observed. At week 10, the intensity of infestation, the attack rate and the severity score for acute tungiasis remained significantly higher in the shoe group than in the repellent group. Per protocol analysis showed that the protective effect of shoes was closely related to the regularity with which shoes were worn.ConclusionsAlthough shoes were requested by the villagers and wearing shoes was encouraged by the investigators at the beginning of the study, the availability of shoes only marginally influenced the attack rate of female sand fleas. The twice-daily application of a plant-based repellent active against sand fleas reduced the attack to zero and lowered tungiasis-associated morbidity to an insignificant level.