Pharmacy World and Science

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 35–41 | Cite as

The efficacy of Prrrikweg® gel in the treatment of insect bites: a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

  • N. Hill
  • C. Stam
  • R. A. van Haselen


Objective: This study was conducted to examine the efficacy of Prrrikweg® gel, a homeopathic after-bite gel, in relleving the effects of mosquito bites, in particular itching and erythema.

Design: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

Setting: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

Subjects: 100 healthy volunteers.

Methods: All subjects were bitten under laboratory conditions by Aedes aegypti mosquitoes at one spot on the ventral aspect of the left forearm and another on a corresponding position on the right forearm. One spot was treated with the homeopathic after-bite gel and the other with a placebo gel.

Main outcome measures: Itching was assessed on a 5-point discrete rating scale at 0, 0.5, 1, 26.5, and 48 h post-bite to compare the itch-relieving efficacy of the two treatments. Erythema development was assessed by photographing the bite sites, measuring length and width of the erythema with at baseline (T0) to the mean erythema surface at 0.5, 1, 26.5, and 48 h post-bite (Tmean) for the two treatments.

Results: Testing erythema development by comparing the ratio T0/Tmean, after-bite gel and the ratio T0/Tmean, placebo gel gave a two-tailed p=0.098 (95% Cl,−0.031–0.361) in favour of the after-bite gel. There was not a statistically significant difference between the itch relief provided by the two treatments (two-tailed p=0.424; 95% Cl,−0.541–0.191). The correlation between itching and erythema was significant (r=0.46; p<0.001).

Conclusions: There are strong indications that the homeopathic after-bite gel reduces erythema development following mosquito bites. The homeopathic mother tinctures of Echinacea angustifolia DC., Ledum palustre L, Urtica urens L. as well as the Hamamelis extract in this gel, whether alone or in combination, are the biologically active ingredients. The homeopathic after-bite gel was not demonstrated to relieve itching, however, based on the correlation between erythema and itching, an effect on itching is not inconceivable.


Aedes oegypti Clinical trials Echinacea angustifolia Erythema Homeopathy Insect bites and stings Ledum palustre Pruritus Urtico urens


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Roitt I, Brostoff DM. Immunology. London: Gower Medical Publishing, 1988;19:1–18.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Soulsby EJL, editor. Immune responses in parasitic infections: immunology, immunopathology, and immunoprophylaxis. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1987(4):176–209.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    British National Formulary. No. 21. London: British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, 1991:366–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Farmacotherapeutisch Kompas [Pharmacotherapeutic compass]. Amstelveen: Centrale Medische Pharmaceutische Commissie van de Ziekenfondsraad, 1994:465–7.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tyler VE, Brady LR, Robbers JE. Pharmacognosy. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1988:103–38.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dukes MNG, editor. Meyler's side effects of drugs. 12th ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1992:366–72.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rash promises for topical antihistamines. Drug Ther Bull 1992;30:49–50.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Groot AC, Weyland JW, Nater JP. Unwanted effects of cosmetics and drugs used in dermatology. 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1994:55–135.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wesseling H, Neef C, editors. Algemene farmacotherapie [General pharmacotherapy]. 6th revised ed. Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum, 1990:255–60.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Teuscher E, Melzig M, Villmann E, Möritz KU. Untersuchungen zum Wirkungsmechanismus ätherischer Öle. Z Phytother 1990;11:87–92.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tragni E, Tubaro A, Melis S, Galli CL. Evidence from two classic irritation tests for an anti-inflammatory action of a natural extract, Echinacina B. Food Chem Toxic 1985;23(2):317–9.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tubaro A, Tragni E, Del Negro P, Galli CL, Della Loggia R. Anti-inflammatory activity of a polysaccharidic fraction of Echinacea angustifolia. J Pharm Pharmacol 1987;39:567–9.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Madaus G. Lehrbuch der biologischen Heilmittel. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1976(2):1727–33.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Hellemont J. Fytotherapeutisch compendium [Phytotherapeutic compendium]. 2nd ed. Utrecht: Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema, 1988;343–44.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Allen TF. Encyclopedia of pure materia medica. New Delhi: B. Jain Publishers, 1975(10):47–8.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Allen TF. Ecyclopedia of pure materia medica. New Delhi: B. Jain Publishers, 1975(1):400–22.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ooms H, Bol AWJM, van Meek JH, van Wijk R. Hormesis, een knelpunt in dosis-effect relaties [Hormesis: a bottleneck in dose-response relationships]. Pharm Weekbl 1993;128(38):1118–22.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Heger M, Niederle S. Interner Abschussbericht zur Verträgtichkeitsstudie V003: Auszug für SRL-Gel und Prrrikweg®-Gel (VSM). Deutsche Homöopathie-Union: 1993.Google Scholar
  19. 18.
    OTC report. Produkten voor zelfmedicatie [Self-medication products]. Den Haag: IMS Nederland, 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hill N, van Haselen RA. Clinical trial of a homeopathic insect after-bite treatment. HomInt R&D Newsletter 1993A;3/4.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hill N, Stam C, Tuinder S, van Haselen R. A placebocontrolled clinical trial investigating the efficacy of a homeopathic after-bite gel in reducing mosquito bite-induced erythema. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. In press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Good Clinical Practice for Trials on Medicinal Products in the European Community, III/3976/88-EN. Brussels: European Commission, 1990.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    GCP-voorbereidingscommissie. Good Clinical Practice voor het onderzoek met geneesmiddelen in de Europese Gemeenschap [Good clinical practice and drug research in the EC]. Utrecht: Nederlandse Stichting ter bevordering van Medisch-Farmaceutische Research, 1993.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Homöopathisches Arzneibuch. Stuttgart: Deutscher Apotheker Verlag, 1978–1985.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kirkwood BR. Essentials of medical statistics. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1988:27–32.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cranston PS, Ramsdale CD, Snow KR, White GB. British mosquitoes. Ambleside: Freshwater Biological Association, 1987:108–19.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Frazier CA. Insect allergy. St. Louis, Missouri: Warren H. Green, 1969:145–75.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Clements AN. The biology of mosquitoes: development, nutrition and reproduction. London: Chapman & Hall, 1993(1):225–62.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sitthi-amorn C, Poshyachinda V. Bias. Lancet 1993;342:286–8.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Homöopathisches Arzneibuch. Berlin: Verlag Dr. Willmar Schwabe, 3.Auflage, 3.durchgesehener Neudruck, 1953:236–7.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    List PH, Hörhammer L. Hagers Handbuch der Pharmazeutischen Praxis. Chemikalien und Drogen. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1976(5):14.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pfister R. Zur Problematik der Behandlung und Nachbehandlung chronischer Dermatosen. Eine klinische Studie über Hametum Salbe. Fortschr Med 1981;99:1264–8.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Korting HC, Schäfer-Korting M, Hart H, Laux P, Schmid M. Anti-inflammatory activity of hamamelis distillate applied topically to the skin: influence of vehicle and dose. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1993;44:315–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. Hill
    • 1
  • C. Stam
    • 2
  • R. A. van Haselen
    • 2
  1. 1.London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineLondonUK
  2. 2.Medical and Scientific DepartmentVSM Geneesmiddelen BVAlkmaarthe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations