TY - JOUR T1 - A community-based validation of the International Alliance for the Control of Scabies Consensus Criteria by expert and non-expert examiners in Liberia JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.06.08.20125682 SP - 2020.06.08.20125682 AU - SL Walker AU - S Collinson AU - J Timothy AU - S Zayay AU - K Kollie AU - E Lebas AU - K Halliday AU - R Pullan AU - M Fallah AU - M Marks Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/06/09/2020.06.08.20125682.abstract N2 - Background The International Alliance for the Control of Scabies (IACS) recently published expert consensus criteria for scabies diagnosis. Formal validation of these criteria is needed to guide implementation. We conducted a study to provide detailed description of the morphology and distribution of scabies lesions as assessed by dermatologists and validate the IACS criteria for diagnosis by both expert and non-expert examiners.Methods Participants from a community in Monrovia, Liberia, were independently assessed by two dermatologists and six mid-level healthcare workers. Lesion morphology and distribution were documented based on the dermatologist examination. Diagnoses were classified by IACS criteria and the sensitivity and specificity of MLHW assessments calculated.Results Papules were the most common lesions (97.8%). Burrows were found in just under half (46.7%) and dermatoscopy was positive in a minority (13.3%). Scabies lesions were found in all body regions but more than 90% of patients could have been diagnosed by an examination of only the limbs. Severity of itch was associated with lesion number (p=0.003). The sensitivity of MLHWs to detect typical scabies ranged between 69-83% and specificity 70-96%. The sensitivity of MLHWs was higher in more extensive disease (78-94%).Conclusions The IACS criteria proved a valid tool for scabies diagnosis. For the purposes of implementation papules and burrows represent truly ‘typical’ scabies lesions. MLHWs are able to diagnose scabies with a high degree of accuracy, demonstrating they could form a key component in population-level control strategies.Plain English Summary Scabies is a very common skin condition in both high- and low-income settings with hundreds of millions of people affected each year. Recently standardised criteria have been proposed to help improve the quality of scabies diagnosis, in particular in low income settings where the access to a skin specialist is very limited.In this study, conducted in Liberia, expert examiners conducted a thorough examination and recorded what different types of skin problems they found in participants with and with and without scabies. We then compared the accuracy of a diagnosis of scabies made by dermatologists to that made by non-specialist healthcare workers who had received a short training course over three days.We found that small bumps (papules) were the most common type of scabies lesion and were found in almost every single patient with scabies. A second type of skin lesion called a burrow was the next most common and was found in just under half of the participants. Other types of scabies lesions which have been described were rare in this study. We found that after the short training course the non-specialists were able to detect about the majority of the cases of scabies correctly.Our study has helped provide detailed data on exactly what types of skin changes are typical of scabies and demonstrated how short training programmes can help improve the skill of non-specialist examiners in diagnosing scabies.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementMichael Marks was supported by a grant from the Academy of Medical Sciences. Steve Walker was supported by a grant from the British Association of Dermatologists. The funders had no role in the design, conduct or analysis of the study.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committees of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (Reference 17796) and the University of Liberia Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation Institutional Review Board (Reference 20-01-195). Written informed consent was obtained from participants aged 18 years and older and from the parents or guardians of children. Verbal assent was obtained from children who were able to provide it.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData are available in the supplementary materials ER -