• Türkçe
    • English
  • English 
    • Türkçe
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   DSpace@Muğla
  • Araştırma Çıktıları | TR-Dizin | WoS | Scopus | PubMed
  • WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
  • View Item
  •   DSpace@Muğla
  • Araştırma Çıktıları | TR-Dizin | WoS | Scopus | PubMed
  • WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Revisiting detachment techniques in human-biting ticks

Thumbnail

View/Open

Tam metin / Full text (849.1Kb)

Date

2016

Author

Belli, Aslı Akın
Derviş, Emine
Kar, Sırrı
Ergönül, Önder
Gargılı, Ayşen
Article has an altmetric score of 6

See more details

Posted by 7 X users
On 3 Facebook pages
21 readers on Mendeley

Metadata

Show full item record

Abstract

Background: Early and complete removal of ticks using the right technique is important to reduce tick-transmitted diseases. Several chemical and mechanical detachment techniques have been described previously. Objective: We aimed to compare the performance of 4 tick-detachment techniques that are widely used in human beings and to determine the optimal method from these techniques. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 160 patients between April and June 2010. Patients with reported tick bite were reviewed retrospectively and divided into the following 4 groups according to the tick-detachment technique used: card detachment, lassoing, freezing, and tweezers. Performance of each technique was evaluated according to the number of fully detached, nondetached, and crushed ticks and the duration of application. Results: Of the 160 tick-bite cases assessed, we found the following efficacy rates: 82.5% (33/40), technique using tweezers; 47.5% (19/40), lassoing technique; 7.5% (3/40), card detachment; and 0% (0/40), freezing technique. The efficacy rate of the technique using tweezers was significantly higher than that of the other 3 techniques (P < .05). Limitations: This was a relatively small sample size and not designed as a randomized clinical trial. Conclusion: Tick detachment using tweezers, performed in an appropriate manner, is the easiest and most effective technique.

Source

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

Volume

75

Issue

2

URI

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2016.01.032
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12809/2440

Collections

  • Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Koleksiyonu [215]
  • PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [2082]
  • Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [6219]
  • WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [6466]



DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
@mire NV
 

 




| Policy | Guide | Contact |

DSpace@Muğla

by OpenAIRE
Advanced Search

sherpa/romeo

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeLanguageDepartmentCategoryPublisherAccess TypeInstitution AuthorThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeLanguageDepartmentCategoryPublisherAccess TypeInstitution Author

My Account

LoginRegister

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
@mire NV
 

 


|| Policy || Guide|| Instruction || Library || Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University || OAI-PMH ||

Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Turkey
If you find any errors in content, please contact:

Creative Commons License
Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Institutional Repository is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 Unported License..

DSpace@Muğla:


DSpace 6.2

tarafından İdeal DSpace hizmetleri çerçevesinde özelleştirilerek kurulmuştur.