Epizoonoses such as scabies, lice and cimicosis are common, vexing disorders that occur worldwide. Historically, many treatment modalities have been employed in the management of these disorders, and most of the drugs described in this review are of historical interest and no longer recommended or in widespread use because of their wide spectrum of adverse effects. More recently, reports documenting resistance against various antiectoparasite drugs, complicated and severe courses of the diseases, and adverse effects of drug therapy have prompted the development of new treatment strategies and drugs for optimal disease management. Because the strategies currently recommended for the treatment of ectoparasites differ worldwide, this review proposes a rational approach to selecting the best therapeutic agent by comparing the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug efficacy and adverse effects. A literature search of the currently Internet accessible libraries PubMed, Medline and Ideal library, of citations of articles found there, and from communications with the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, Germany, was conducted based on this approach. One major observation of this literature search is that permethrin is the treatment of choice for lice and scabies in the US and in Great Britain, whereas lindane is still recommended for scabies in most other European countries because of its longer-standing record of effectiveness. Although permethrin has not yet been proven to be more effective than lindane in treating infections with these ectoparasites, it currently appears to have the best efficacy versus safety profile of topical treatments for scabies and lice. Ivermectin is a newer oral drug for the treatment of ectoparasites, which has been used with great success in the treatment of onchocercosis and other endoparasites. Although ivermectin appears to be a promising drug, its role in the treatment of ectoparasitic infections will be clarified as more study data become available. Finally, it is important to emphasise the clinical aspects of ectoparasite therapy and that providing the patient with optimal instructions on the use of topical therapeutics is of great importance in avoiding adverse effects and assuring complete removal of the ectoparasite, thereby avoiding the development of drug-resistance.

A wide range of different therapeutic regimens are used for atopic dermatitis. Although many treatment modalities are well established worldwide among clinicians, only the minority of these therapy recommendations are based on results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). To close the gap between such 'generally' recommended therapies and therapies that are based on data from controlled trials, this review focuses not only on the pharmacological and clinical aspects of the currently proven agents, but also on the advantages and disadvantages of therapies that have not yet been completely tested.A review of the available literature concerning the pharmacological profile and also the level of evidence of therapeutic efficacy of all currently known topical and systemic agents for the treatment of atopic dermatitis reveals a large gap between the knowledge concerning the pharmacological action in vitro and the evidence of clinical efficacy in many cases. We agree with the conclusion of previous reviews that numerous therapies for atopic dermatitis urgently require more independent RCTs and especially comparative trials (e.g. corticosteroids vs calcineurin inhibitors). These are required in order to facilitate the choice of therapeutic strategy for the individual treatment of atopic dermatitis, with its broad spectrum of clinical manifestations and potential complications in adult patients and, particularly, in children.Finally, we also review preclinical trials with several new drugs. Immunomodulators appear to promise a new dimension for the future of therapy for atopic dermatitis, especially for severe and otherwise refractory forms or as alternatives to corticosteroids, that is, to treat facial atopic eczema without the risk of adverse effects.

This section, multilevel policies, reviews the impact that has been and can be made by health policy changes at multiple levels, strategies and resources for increasing adherence to population prevention recommendations, and how changes at the microlevel and macrolevel of the environment can provide opportunities and rewards for healthy behaviors and disincentives for unhealthy behaviors. Policies that support primary prevention of cardiovascular disease require the participation of numerous stakeholders at multiple levels, such as governmental and regulatory agencies. Such policy changes support a healthy lifestyle, as in designated smoke-free areas; laws that mandate that food purveyors reduce sodium and fat content or, eliminate trans-fats; and availability of safe parks and bike and walking trails; and also provide a supportive environment that in turn reinforces adherence to primary prevention. Health-related policies have a major impact at the societal level in both developed and developing countries; thus, it is important to understand the role that policy plays in promoting a healthier lifestyle and the prevention of cardiovascular disease. This section discusses how health policies can impact primary prevention and adherence to healthful recommendations, with examples focused on physical activity and diet.