Search

Abstract Background Latex gloves are essential for protecting healthcare workers from biological hazards but pose a risk of latex allergy, particularly due to powdered, protein, and allergen content. Recent advancements in latex glove manufacturing have led to reduced levels of extractable proteins, a known factor triggering allergenic reaction. This study aimed to compare latex sensitization between nursing staff using low-protein and high-protein latex gloves at a tertiary university hospital in Thailand. Methods A cross-sectional analytical study categorized participants into two groups based on glove exposure: the low extractable protein group (only exposed to non-powdered latex gloves with extractable protein levels below 50 µg/g) and the high extractable protein group (exposed to powdered latex gloves with levels above 50 µg/g). The sample size comprised 163 individuals in the low protein group and 318 in the high protein group (1:2). Latex allergy symptoms and sensitization were assessed using a self-administered questionnaire and latex-specific IgE measurement (ImmunoCAP), respectively. Data analysis involved descriptive and inferential statistics, including odds ratios and 95%CI. Results Demographic data was mostly similar in both exposure groups except for age. No significant differences in latex sensitization between the low and high protein groups were found via latex-specific IgE measurement (crude OR 1.90, 95%CI: 0.5, 7.18), potentially attributed to lower extractable protein levels in powdered latex gloves compared to previous studies. In contrast, the low protein group exhibited significantly fewer current latex allergy symptoms in both bivariate (crude OR 0.24, 95%CI: 0.06, 0.74) and multiple variable analysis (adjusted OR 0.18, 95%CI: 0.04, 0.86). Moreover, there was a significant reduction in latex allergy symptoms among the low protein group, decreasing from 9.8% who reported experiencing symptoms (when powdered latex gloves were used) to 1.2% who still reported current symptoms (OR 0.11, 95%CI: 0.02, 0.44). Conclusions This study underscores the importance of using non-powdered and low-protein latex gloves to reduce latex allergy symptoms while emphasizing the need for further investigation into the relationship between extractable protein levels in addition to the attempt of the major allergen removal and latex sensitization amid evolving glove manufacturing practices.

Aim: This electronic survey was carried out to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practices among the oral health practitioners. Methods: A questionnaire survey was conducted among undergraduates, graduated practitioners, and specialist practitioners. A Google Form that included a specified instruction format, informed consent with a clear description of the purpose of the study, and questions in different categories were sent through Whatsapp and email. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses. The association of knowledge and attitude with respect to oral health professionals was analyzed with the Chi-square test. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 570 participants. Thirty percent of participants encountered ADR related to the drugs available in the market and 33.2% of participants encountered adverse reaction related to materials used in practice. ADR should be reported as soon as it is detected, according to this study about 12.1% of participants reported the ADRs, and this reporting is primarily for patient safety. Almost 66.8% of participants perceived that dental products can cause ADR owing to a lack of information about ADR and reporting procedures, or due to fear of legal concerns. Only about 9.5% of the participants had previously attended an ADR workshop. Conclusion: Oral health practitioners have a general understanding of ADR; however, there is substantial evidence of underreporting and a lack of reporting system information. Organizing an orientation program and raising awareness about ADR reporting could help improve spontaneous reporting and better patient care.

Objectives: We conducted a multicenter study using the same questionnaire in 1999 and 2014 to investigate changes in the characteristics of patients with latex allergy. Methods: We mailed questionnaires on latex allergy to hospitals in Japan that were members of the Japanese Latex Allergy Society. Results: We compared the 25 responses received in 2014 and the 81 responses received in 1999. With regard to the age distribution, the number of patients with latex allergy in their 20s declined significantly from 1999 to 2014 (P=0.004). The largest proportion of latex allergy cases was observed among those aged

Abstract Background Natural rubber latex and chlorhexidine have previously been identified as causative substances in perioperative anaphylaxis. A pelvic examinations is generally considered noninvasive, however, this procedure is rarely associated with severe allergic reactions. We reported a rare case of dual latex and chlorhexidine allergies which caused anaphylaxis after pelvic examination in a woman with a history of latex-related fruits allergy. Case presentation A 54-year-old woman had severe anaphylaxis after a pelvic examination due to dual latex and chlorhexidine (CHX) allergies. The gynecologist used CHX for the vaginal preparation and wore latex-containing gloves with lubricating gel during the examination. In vivo and in vitro tests revealed CHX sensitization by a positive skin prick test to chlorhexidine at a very low concentration (0.002 mg/mL), and a positive basophil activation test to CHX. Latex allergy was confirmed by a positive specific IgE to latex and a positive glove-use test at 20 min. An analysis of specific IgE to latex component revealed positive results for Hev b 1, 5, 6.02, and 11. As she also had a past history of fruit allergy, prick-to-prick testing with latex-related fruits was performed. The results were positive for avocado, banana, jackfruit, kiwi, and longan. Conclusions Concomitant mucosal exposure of both natural rubber latex and CHX in highly sensitized patients during pelvic examinations can lead to severe anaphylaxis. Pre-procedural screening for an allergy to latex or CHX, or to any other allergen, should be performed in patients where there is suspicion of a specific allergy due to a previous allergic reaction. Increased awareness of these two allergens in all healthcare settings may improve patient safety.

Natural rubber latex is found in numerous medical and dental products. Adverse latex reactions in dental patients and practitioners have significantly increased since the introduction of universal precautions for infection control. These reactions range from contact dermatitis to potentially life-threatening hypersensitivity. Patients with a history of spina bifida, urogenital anomalies, multiple surgical procedures, allergic reactions or atopy, health care personnel and latex production workers are at increased risk of latex allergy. Diagnosis is based on a combination of clinical history and laboratory tests. Identification of latex sources and the avoidance of latex exposure are critical for protecting both dental patients and dental personnel.

Objectives: Exposure to latex allergens in latex gloves can cause occupational health problems in nurses, yet latex gloves are still widely used in Thai hospitals. Therefore, we conducted a study to determine the prevalence of latex sensitization in nurses and identify risk factors associated with sensitization. Methods: A questionnaire, providing information on personal characteristics, ill-health, working conditions and symptoms related to latex product use, was administered to 363 female nurses working in two tertiary hospitals in southern Thailand. Latex sensitization was confirmed using a solid phase immunoassay to detect anti-latex IgE antibodies. Total glove protein levels were determined by using a modified Lowry method and latex aeroallergens by a competitive inhibition immunoassay. Results: The overall prevalence of latex sensitization was 4.4%. Respiratory symptoms related to latex glove use were significantly associated with latex sensitization (OR = 5.5, 95% CI: 1.57-19). Total glove protein levels ranged 87.8-250.8 μg protein/dm2. The prevalence of latex sensiti- zation was higher (6.6% vs. 2.2%) in the hospital where gloves with higher protein levels (82-438 μg/g vs. 86-170 μg/g) were used. Furthermore, latex sensitization prevalence increased from 3% to 5% with increased average departmental aeroallergen concentrations. Conclusions: Latex sensitization prevalence in Thai nurses was higher than previously reported. Respiratory exposure seems to play an important role, in addition to dermal exposure. If latex gloves cannot be replaced by non-latex alternatives, replacement with gloves with lower protein content should be considered.

Dental practitioners routinely use gloves made of latex while treating patients. Latex is also seen in masks, eye wear, clinic gowns as well as a constituent of many house hold products and medical devices. Exposure to latex proteins and chemicals associated with these materials can give rise to allergic responses in individuals who are sensitive to NRL proteins. The adverse latex reactions range from contact dermatitis to life threatening anaphylaxis. This article provides the reader with a review of latex allergy which throws light on its clinical presentation, diagnosis, prevention and management.

A continuous exposure or contact to latex products may sensitize the human body by causing mild to fatal reactions. Despite the availability of the literature, medical personnel are still unaware of the implications of the use of latex materials. The increased awareness to prevent the transmission of infectious blood borne pathogens has lead to increased usage of medical gloves among health care workers. This increased usage of medical gloves, along with improved methods in diagnosing latex allergy, has been the reason for the rise in the number of reported cases. This has lead to recognition of latex allergy as a serious medical concern. Patients in high-risk groups must be assessed carefully, so that appropriate protocols can be used to protect them from contact with latex.

Background: Natural rubber latex (NRL) allergy is a common occupational disease in health care workers (HCW). However, few reports have compared the major allergen of HCWs to those in gloves that are routinely used in the hospital. The aim of this study was to evaluate the major NRL allergens in gloves used by HCWs. Methods: We studied 20 HCWs who were suspected to have latex allergy (LA). We performed a skin prick test (SPT) using NRL allergens. Serological testing was performed using the ImmunoCAP™. The total amount of protein and the antigenic protein concentrations extracted from NRL gloves were measured. Four different types of FITkit™ were used to measure the concentrations of Hev b 1, 3, 5, and 6.02 in the gloves. Results: A SPT using NRL extract identified 14 cases with positive reactions. The sensitivity and specificity of the SPT scores to the NRL glove extract were 100%. The sensitivity of latex specific IgE was 100% but the specificity was 14.2%. The sensitivity and specificity of rHev b 6.02 specific IgE were 100% in the LA group. The total amounts of protein from the medical gloves for surgery and examination were 265 μg/g and 95 μg/g, respectively. The antigenic protein concentrations in the gloves were 24.9 μg/g and 1.0 μg/g, respectively. The total amounts of the specific four allergens in the NRL gloves were 2.18 μg/g and 0.45 μg/g, respectively. Conclusions: We concluded that the main allergen of HCWs who have been sensitized occupationally by NRL gloves was Hev b 6.02.

Oral allergy syndrome (OAS) is defined as the symptoms of IgE-mediated immediate allergy localized in the oral mucosa, and the characteristics depend on the lability of the antigen. Another term used for this syndrome is pollen-food allergy (PFS); the patient is sensitized with pollen via the airways and exhibits an allergic reaction to food antigen with a structural similarity to the pollen (class 2 food allergy). In addition to PFS, latex-fruit syndrome is also well-known as the disease exhibiting OAS. In treating the condition, it must be noted that most but not all symptoms of PFS are those of OAS. In many cases, antigens become edible by heating, but some are resistant to heating. Also, since the exacerbation of atopic dermatitis is occasionally observed after the intake of cooked antigens in asymptomatic individuals, careful inquiry of the history is important in designing the treatment. Immunotherapy against the cross-reacting pollen has also been attempted in PFS.

El objetivo principal de este trabajo es, describir los pasos que se han dado en un hospital público para ir «Hacia un Hospital sin Látex». El aumento de la prevalencia de las enfermedades alérgicas, nos lleva a realizar una serie de actuaciones englobadas dentro de una política hospitalaria para disminuir la presencia de látex en el hospital. Con ello, queremos conseguir disminuir la alergia allátex de los trabajadores y evitar en los pacientes especialmente sensibles las posibles reacciones alérgicas al ser intervenidos quirúrgicamente.The main objective of this work is to describe the steps that hand been given in a public hospital in order to go «Towards a hospital without latex». The increasing of allergy illness is the reason because of that; we have to make a number of actions in a hospitable policy, with the purpose of decreasing the latex content in the hospital. With theses actions we want to get a latex allergy decreasing in the workers avoiding in the sensitive patients the possible allergy reactions when they are performed an operation.

Latex allergy has become an occupational hazard among healthcare workers. Atopy, intensity and duration of exposure have been recognized as predisposing factors for latex sensitization. Frequency of sensitization varies among countries. So we decided to investigate the prevalence of latex sensitization and potential risk factors among healthcare workers in a general hospital. In a cross sectional study by distributing a questionnaire among 876 employees of a general hospital, we investigated the prevalence of latex allergy and the potential risk factors for latex sensitization. We collected information about occupational history, including specific tasks performed, time of first exposure to latex, number of pairs of gloves used, and duration of weekly exposure. We also investigated the interval between first exposure and onset of symptoms. We asked about pre-existing rhinoconjuctivitis, asthma, atopic and contact dermatitis, hay fever, autoimmune diseases, and food allergies. This survey documented a high prevalence of adverse reaction to all latex containing materials (52.5%). 37.7% of responder had adverse reaction to latex gloves. The highest prevalence of adverse reaction to all latex containing materials was found in the surgical operating room, followed by emergency unit and internal medicine wards. According to this study, frequency of adverse reaction to latex was high among health care workers. This may be due to relatively low response rate, low quality of latex products in Iran, and the method of measurement. Whenever, the need for implementing prevention program, using latex-free methods and training of employees to reduce adverse reaction to latex is apparent.

Background: While many cases of latex allergy have been reported in Japanese health care workers (HCWs) since 1992, there have been no follow-up studies after removing latex from the workplace. We had previously replaced all working environment latex gloves and latex products with low-allergen or non-latex products. The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the benefits of the latex allergy countermeasures that were taken in our hospital, and the effects of life guidance education. Methods: We investigated 16 latex-allergic HCWs in our hospital. We gave them a detailed questionnaire and tested them by a skin prick test (SPT) with latex extract and specific IgE antibodies against latex using the Pharmacia CAP RAST system, RAST FEIA. We compared these results with earlier results from the time of diagnosis. Results: According to the questionnaire, none of the HCWs had changed their work habits, though all were avoiding the use of latex products as much as possible. Of the 16 patients, 81.2% were eating foods for which cross reactivity with latex has been reported. However, the foods had not induced severe allergic symptoms. In the SPT, 62.5% of scores decreased and 81.2% of patients had decreases in specific IgE antibody levels. Conclusions: After avoiding latex products and following our educational suggestions, the patients' allergy symptoms had generally improved. This indicates that our countermeasures against latex allergy were largely successful.

The occupational uses of latex gloves may be associated with allergic rhinitis. Hypersensitivity to latex has been shown to be IgE-mediated. However, late nasal responses to latex have not been reported. The present report describes a clinical and immunological study of a dental nurse with work-related rhinitis induced by the use of latex gloves. To examine whether late nasal symptoms were associated with infiltration of T cells and eosinophils and also with preferential expression of T helper 2 (Th2) cell type cytokine mRNA, nasal biopsies were performed before and 24 h after latex provocation and were processed for immunohistology and in situ hybridization. Latex induced early and late nasal responses. After latex provocation, the numbers of T cells and eosinophils were markedly increased compared with number on the control day. In situ hybridization confirmed Th2 type cytokine mRNA expression at 24 h after latex provocation. These results suggest that latex provokes IgE-mediated early and late nasal responses and that late nasal symptoms are associated with an infiltration of T cells and eosinohils and the production of Th2 type cytokines.

Latex allergy has become an occupational hazard among healthcare workers. Atopy, intensity and duration of exposure have been recognized as predisposing factors for latex sensitization. Frequency of sensitization varies among countries. So we decided to investigate the prevalence of latex sensitization and potential risk factors among healthcare workers in a general hospital. In a cross sectional study by distributing a questionnaire among 876 employees of a general hospital, we investigated the prevalence of latex allergy and the potential risk factors for latex sensitization. We collected information about occupational history, including specific tasks performed, time of first exposure to latex, number of pairs of gloves used, and duration of weekly exposure. We also investigated the interval between first exposure and onset of symptoms. We asked about pre-existing rhinoconjuctivitis, asthma, atopic and contact dermatitis, hay fever, autoimmune diseases, and food allergies. This survey documented a high prevalence of adverse reaction to all latex containing materials (52.5%). 37.7% of responder had adverse reaction to latex gloves. The highest prevalence of adverse reaction to all latex containing materials was found in the surgical operating room, followed by emergency unit and internal medicine wards. According to this study, frequency of adverse reaction to latex was high among health care workers. This may be due to relatively low response rate, low quality of latex products in Iran, and the method of measurement. Whenever, the need for implementing prevention program, using latex-free methods and training of employees to reduce adverse reaction to latex is apparent.

Abstract Background Occupational reaction to natural rubber latex (NRL) glove use by healthcare employees has been an area of increasing concern. Unfortunately, there is little data demonstrating the prevalence and severity of actual reactivity to NRL. Method Occupational reaction to NRL was estimated using workers' compensation claims filed by healthcare employees in Oregon for the period of 1987–1998. For the first ten years, these claims were estimated by source and conditions consistent with NRL glove reactions, while in the last two years a specific code developed in 1997 for NRL glove reactions was also employed. Results The claim rate was on average 0.58 per 10,000 healthcare workers annually, which constituted 0.29% of all workers' compensation claims. The most common condition experienced was dermatitis (80%) and most common body part affected was the hands (55.4%). The majority of claimants, 45 (69.2%), reported taking less than a month off work, suggesting most reactions were minor in nature, although one fatality was reported. The average NRL claim cost was $8,309.48. Overall the average cost per insured healthcare worker was approximately $0.50 per year. The occupational groups with the highest number of claims were nurses (30.8% of claimants) and nursing aides and orderlies (24.6% of claimants). Conclusions In comparison with other workers' compensation claims filed by healthcare workers during this period, 0.25% of the total was potentially related to NRL gloves. The rare incidence of respiratory and ocular claims is inconsistent with the hypothesis that asthmatic or conjunctival reactions to NRL gloves are common.