No abstract

Summary Background Scabies is a common parasitic skin condition that causes considerable morbidity globally. Clinical and epidemiological research for scabies has been limited by a lack of standardization of diagnostic methods. Objectives To develop consensus criteria for the diagnosis of common scabies that could be implemented in a variety of settings. Methods Consensus diagnostic criteria were developed through a Delphi study with international experts. Detailed recommendations were collected from the expert panel to define the criteria features and guide their implementation. These comments were then combined with a comprehensive review of the available literature and the opinion of an expanded group of international experts to develop detailed, evidence‐based definitions and diagnostic methods. Results The 2020 International Alliance for the Control of Scabies (IACS) Consensus Criteria for the Diagnosis of Scabies include three levels of diagnostic certainty and eight subcategories. Confirmed scabies (level A) requires direct visualization of the mite or its products. Clinical scabies (level B) and suspected scabies (level C) rely on clinical assessment of signs and symptoms. Evidence‐based, consensus methods for microscopy, visualization and clinical symptoms and signs were developed, along with a media library. Conclusions The 2020 IACS Criteria represent a pragmatic yet robust set of diagnostic features and methods. The criteria may be implemented in a range of research, public health and clinical settings by selecting the appropriate diagnostic levels and subcategories. These criteria may provide greater consistency and standardization for scabies diagnosis. Validation studies, development of training materials and development of survey methods are now required. What is already known about this topic? The diagnosis of scabies is limited by the lack of accurate, objective tests. Microscopy of skin scrapings can confirm the diagnosis, but it is insensitive, invasive and often impractical. Diagnosis usually relies on clinical assessment, although visualization using dermoscopy is becoming increasingly common. These diagnostic methods have not been standardized, hampering the interpretation of findings from clinical research and epidemiological surveys, and the development of scabies control strategies. What does this study add? International consensus diagnostic criteria for common scabies were developed through a Delphi study with global experts. The 2020 International Alliance for the Control of Scabies (IACS) Criteria categorize diagnosis at three levels of diagnostic certainty (confirmed, clinical and suspected scabies) and eight subcategories, and can be adapted to a range of research and public health settings. Detailed definitions and figures are included to aid training and implementation. The 2020 IACS Criteria may facilitate the standardization of scabies diagnosis.

This summary relates to: https://doi.

Summary Background Over the last few years, several articles on dermoscopy of non‐neoplastic dermatoses have been published, yet there is poor consistency in the terminology among different studies. Objectives We aimed to standardize the dermoscopic terminology and identify basic parameters to evaluate in non‐neoplastic dermatoses through an expert consensus. Methods The modified Delphi method was followed, with two phases: (i) identification of a list of possible items based on a systematic literature review and (ii) selection of parameters by a panel of experts through a three‐step iterative procedure (blinded e‐mail interaction in rounds 1 and 3 and a face‐to‐face meeting in round 2). Initial panellists were recruited via e‐mail from all over the world based on their expertise on dermoscopy of non‐neoplastic dermatoses. Results Twenty‐four international experts took part in all rounds of the consensus and 13 further international participants were also involved in round 2. Five standardized basic parameters were identified: (i) vessels (including morphology and distribution); (ii) scales (including colour and distribution); (iii) follicular findings; (iv) ‘other structures’ (including colour and morphology); and (v) ‘specific clues’. For each of them, possible variables were selected, with a total of 31 different subitems reaching agreement at the end of the consensus (all of the 29 proposed initially plus two more added in the course of the consensus procedure). Conclusions This expert consensus provides a set of standardized basic dermoscopic parameters to follow when evaluating inflammatory, infiltrative and infectious dermatoses. This tool, if adopted by clinicians and researchers in this field, is likely to enhance the reproducibility and comparability of existing and future research findings and uniformly expand the universal knowledge on dermoscopy in general dermatology. What's already known about this topic? Over the last few years, several papers have been published attempting to describe the dermoscopic features of non‐neoplastic dermatoses, yet there is poor consistency in the terminology among different studies. What does this study add? The present expert consensus provides a set of standardized basic dermoscopic parameters to follow when evaluating inflammatory, infiltrative and infectious dermatoses. This consensus should enhance the reproducibility and comparability of existing and future research findings and uniformly expand the universal knowledge on dermoscopy in general dermatology.

No abstract