Epidemiological Study of Host Factors Responsible for Tinea Cruris Infection & Clinical Resistance to Treatment

  • Shanta Passi Assistant Professor, Department of Dermatology, ESIC Medical College & Hospital, Faridabad.
  • Namrata Kahlon Assistant Professor, Department of Physiology, ESIC Medical College & Hospital, Faridabad.
  • Deepika Uikey Senior Resident, Dermatology, ESIC Medical College & Hospital, Faridabad.
Keywords: Dermatophytes, socio-economic status, modified Kupuswamy scale 2017


Background: Superficial fungal infection are most common fungal infection affecting 20 -25% of population living in tropical and subtropical countries. Global warming, rapid industrialization, migration of population and changing lifestyle are contributory factors.

Aim: To study the host factors responsible for Tinea cruris infection and clinical resistance to treatment.

Methods: Hundred patients of tinea cruris were taken for study and data regarding age, occupation, income, education and prior treatment taken was collected. Modified Kupuswamy scale 2017 was applied for socioeconomic status.

Results: ‘Majority of patients were males (85%). Young adults (20-40 years) with low socioeconomic status were predominantly affected. Application of steroids and poor compliance to treatment were contributory factors in development of clinical resistance to treatment.

Conclusion: By improving working environment and socioeconomic status, mass awareness, proper counseling we can restrain the ongoing epidemic of dermatophytes infection.


Download data is not yet available.


1. Deshmukh SK,Verekar SV, Shrivastav A 2010 The occurance of keratophillicfungi in selected soils of Ladakh,Nature 2(11); 1247- 52
2. Bhatia & Sharma: Epidemiological studies on dermatophytosis in human patients in Himachal Pradesh, India Springer plus 2014 3;134
3. Singh S, Beena PM(2003a)Profile of Dermatophyte infection in Baroda. Indian J of dermatol venereol leprol 69(4): 281-283
4. Balakumar S, Rajan S, Thirunal Sundari T, Jeeva S (2012)
Epidemiology of dermatophytes in and around Tiruchirapali,
Tamilnadu, India. Asian Pac J Trop dis 2(4): 286-289
5. Sarma S, Barthakur AK, (2007) A clinic-epidemiological study of dermatophytes in Northeast India. Indian J of dermatol venerol
leprol 73(6) 427-28
6. Rajesh R, Subramaniam K, Padma Vathy BK, (2006) Prevalence
and species profile of dermatophytes in rural referral centre. Indian
J sex transm dis 27(2) 70 – 74
7. Singh T. Sharma S. Nagesh S. Socioeconomic status scales
updated for 2017. Int J Res Med Sci 2017; 5: 3264-67
8. Goomatee K, Jeewon Rajesh. What factors contribute to a higher frequency of skin infections among adults in Mauritius. 2013
Nasza Dermatologia online 2013;4(3):297-302
9. De freitas Rs, Neves PS, Charbel CE, Criad PR, Nunes RS etal.
Investigation of superficial mycosis in cutaneous allergy patients using topical or systemic corticosteroids. Int J dermatol 2017; 56: 194-8
10. Sucheta Pathania, Shivprakash M.etal. A propective study of the epidemiological and clinical patterns of recurrent dermatophytosis at atertiary care hospital in India. IJDVL 2018; 84(6)678-84
11. Balkrishnan R. The importance of medical adherencein improving chronic disease related outcome: what we know and what we need to further know: med care2005; 43:517-20
12. G Gupta, P. Mallefet, D. W.Kress, A Sergeant. Adherence to topical dermatological therapy. Lessons from oral drug treatment. 2009 British J of dermatology 161(2) 221-7
How to Cite
Passi S, Kahlon N, Uikey D. Epidemiological Study of Host Factors Responsible for Tinea Cruris Infection & Clinical Resistance to Treatment. Int Arch BioMed Clin Res [Internet]. 2019Mar.21 [cited 2020Sep.27];5(1):4-. Available from: https://iabcr.org/index.php/iabcr/article/view/454