Interventerions for impetigo

Added July 22, 2019

Citation: Koning S., Van der Sande R., Verhagen A.P., et al. Interventerions for impetigo. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD003261.

There is good evidence that the topical antibiotics mupirocin and fusidic acid are equal to, or possibly more effective than, oral treatment for people with limited disease. Fusidic acid, mupirocin, and retapamulin are probably equally effective.

Impetigo is a common, superficial bacterial skin infection, most frequently encountered in children. There is no generally agreed standard therapy, and guidelines for treatment differ widely. This review evaluates the effects of treatments for impetigo, including non-pharmacological interventions and ‘waiting for natural resolution’. Researchers identified 68 randomised controlled trials comparing various treatments for impetigo. Altogether, these studies evaluated 26 oral treatments and 24 topical treatments, including placebo, and results were described for 5708 participants. Overall, topical antibiotics showed better cure rates than topical placebo. As well, topical mupirocin was superior to the oral antibiotic, oral erythromycin. We found that the oral antibiotic, oral penicillin, is not effective for impetigo, while other oral antibiotics (e.g. erythromycin and cloxacillin) can help. It is unclear if oral antibiotics are superior to topical antibiotics for people with extensive impetigo.


Disclaimer: This summary has been written by staff and volunteers of Evidence Aid in order to make the content of the original document accessible to decision makers who are searching for the available evidence on the health of refugees and asylum seekers but may not have the time, initially, to read the original report in full. This summary is not intended as a substitute for the medical advice of physicians, other health workers, professional associations, guideline developers, or national governments and international agencies. If readers of this summary think that the evidence that is presented within it is relevant to their decision-making they should refer to the content and details of the original article, and the advice and guidelines offered by other sources of expertise, before making decisions. Evidence Aid cannot be held responsible for any decisions made about the health of refugees and asylum seekers on the basis of this summary alone.