Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Archives
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Archives
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
OtherEvidence-Based Clinical Practice

Management of Brown Recluse Spider Bites in Primary Care

James W. Mold and David M. Thompson
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice September 2004, 17 (5) 347-352; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.17.5.347
James W. Mold
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David M. Thompson
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Baseline Characteristics of Enrolled Patients (N = 256)

    CharacteristicPercentage
    Age group
        0 to 95
        10 to 1912
        20 to 4445
        45 to 6431
        ≥657
    Gender
        Male38
        Female62
    Spider identified by credible witness or clinician13
    Brown recluse spiders seen in vicinity57
    Season when bite occurred
        Winter9
        Spring37
        Summer40
        Fall14
    Place where bite occurred
        Indoors56
        Outdoors20
        No idea24
    Location of bite
        Arm27
        Leg45
        Trunk19
        Head9
    Severity (clinician rating)
        Mild34
        Moderate56
        Severe10
    Initial probability that lesion was brown recluse spider bite
        Possible28
        Probable or definite72
    Previous brown recluse bite12
    Diabetes mellitus5
    Use of NSAID at time of bite7
    Patient felt the bite when it occurred15
    Local symptoms/signs at enrollment
        Pain66
        Itching64
        Tenderness75
        Blister or vesicles29
        Necrosis39
    Systemic symptoms/signs at enrollment
        Symptoms28
        Signs14
    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Study Population by Treatment Group Showing Mean (S.D.) Baseline Severity and Outcomes for Each (N=189)

    Treatments P-value for between Group DifferencesErythema Diameter (cm)Necrosis Diameter (cm)Healing Time (from Time of Bite in Days)Percentage Resulting in Scarring
    Conservative*
        Yes (N = 121)5.8(5.3)0.39(0.71)23.0(20.9)23.0
        No (N = 68)5.6(5.5)0.34(0.66)20.5(14.7)17.5
        P value.76.61.36.36
    Meat tenderizer
        Yes (N = 4)4.0(1.7)0.63(1.3)6(1.4)0
        No (N = 185)5.7(5.4)0.36(0.72)21.8(17.9)20.2
        P value.13.70.21.61
    Antihistamine
        Yes (N = 56)6.8(5.9)0.25(0.74)19.0(13.6)7.3
        No (N = 133)5.4(5.2)0.39(0.72)22.4(18.9)23.8
        P value.09.19.20.02
    Dapsone
        Yes (N = 42)6.7(5.5)0.42(1.0)25.0(13.5)29.0
        No (N = 147)5.5(5.4)0.35(0.65)21.0(18.6)18.3
        P value.19.69.15.17
    DC Current
        Yes (N = 6)6.6(4.2)0.75(0.88)28.2(27.1)16.7
        No (N = 183)5.7(5.4)0.35(0.72)21.4(17.5)20.2
        P value.69.19.57.83
    High-dose Vitamin C
        Yes (N = 14)6.8(5.8)0.38(0.60)29.8(23.7)44.5
        No (N = 175)5.6(5.4)0.36(0.74)21.2(17.5)18.9
        P value.43.94.16.06
    Systemic corticosteroids
        Yes (N = 76)6.0(6.0)0.28(0.59)24.9(19.0)17.0
        No (N = 113)5.6(5.2)0.40(0.78)20.3(17.3)21.5
        P value.55.17.12.49
    Local injection corticosteroids
        Yes (N = 13)3.6(2.1)0.29(0.31)19.8(11.6)30
        No (N = 176)5.8(5.5)0.37(0.74)21.8(18.2)19.5
        P value.002.40.73.42
    Topical corticosteroids
        Yes (N = 12)3.7(2.7)0.08(0.13)17.9(12.6)10.0
        No (N = 177)5.8(5.5)0.38(0.74)21.9(18.1)20.7
        P value.02<.0001.50.41
    Systemic antibiotics
        Yes (N = 152)6.0(5.5)0.42(0.78)21.8(15.0)21.4
        No (N = 37)5.3(5.2)0.28(0.64)21.4(21.5)18.1
        P value.31.11.87.58
    Topical antibiotics
        Yes (N = 50)5.4(3.9)0.51(0.81)22.7(23.1)26.3
        No (N = 139)6.2(5.8)0.32(0.64)21.4(16.3)18.5
        P value.32.20.75.28
    Topical nitroglycerine
        Yes (N = 24)6.7(4.8)0.34(0.61)24.2(19.4)28.6
        No (N = 165)5.6(5.5)0.37(0.74)21.3(17.7)19.0
        P value.30.87.49.30
    • * Conservative treatment included any one or more of the following: expectant observation, cool compresses, elevation, exercise avoidance, immobilization, and/or cleansing.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Multivariate Models for the Two Outcome Measures Treatment Options Considered As Independent Variables (N = 174)

    VariablesLη Heal Time* β (95% CI)Scarring Odds Ratio (95% CI)
    Dapsone0.37(0.05,0.70)4.27(1.05,17.44)
    Systemic corticosteroids0.25(0.004,0.50)NS
    Erythema diameter (cm)0.02(0.004,0.04)NS
    Necrosis (yes/no)NS4.60(1.69,12.53)
    Severity (severe)NS7.45(2.12,26.14)
    Treatment delay (days)0.08(0.05,0.11)NS
    Age0.010(0.004,0.02)NS
    Diabetes mellitus0.55(0.08,1.01)NS
    • * For the linear regression model, R2= 0.3667 and adjusted R2= 0.3295

    • NS, not significant.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice: 17 (5)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice
Vol. 17, Issue 5
1 Sep 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Management of Brown Recluse Spider Bites in Primary Care
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Management of Brown Recluse Spider Bites in Primary Care
James W. Mold, David M. Thompson
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice Sep 2004, 17 (5) 347-352; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.17.5.347

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Management of Brown Recluse Spider Bites in Primary Care
James W. Mold, David M. Thompson
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice Sep 2004, 17 (5) 347-352; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.17.5.347
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Dietary Calcium Intake and Obesity
  • Patients with a Family History of Cancer: Identification and Management
  • Postvasectomy Semen Analysis: Are Men Following Up?
Show more Evidence-Based Clinical Practice

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire