4.4 Article

S1 Guideline onychomycosis

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ddg.14988_g

关键词

fungal nail infection; nail fungus; Onychomycosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Onychomycosis is a common fungal infection of the nails. The German S1-guideline provides updated recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of onychomycosis based on current international guidelines and expert literature review. The guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary committee and approved by participating medical societies following comprehensive internal and external reviews.
Onychomycosis is a fungal infection of the fingernails and toenails. In Europe, tinea unguium is mainly caused by dermatophytes. The diagnostic workup compromises microscopic examination, culture and/or molecular testing (nail scrapings). Local treatment with antifungal nail polish is recommended for mild or moderate nail infections. In case of moderate to severe onychomycosis, oral treatment is recommended (if no contraindications are present). Treatment should consist of topical treatment and systemic agents. The aim of this update of the German S1-guideline is to simplify the selection and implementation of appropriate diagnostics and treatment. The guideline was based on current international guidelines and the results of a literature review conducted by the experts of the guideline committee. This multidisciplinary committee consisted of representatives from the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German-Speaking Mycological Society (DMykG), the Association of German Dermatologists (BVDD), the German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology (DGHM), the German Society of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Working Group for Pediatric Dermatology (APD) and the German Society for Pediatric Infectious Diseases (DGPI). The Division of Evidence-based Medicine (dEBM) provided methodological assistance. The guideline was approved by the participating medical societies following a comprehensive internal and external review.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据