Search

Background: Preservatives present in cosmetics and other industrial products can cause allergic contact dermatitis. The aim of the study was to assess the frequency of allergy to selected preservatives in consecutive patients examined due to contact dermatitis in the Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine, Łódź, and to establish whether individuals sensitized to formaldehyde react simultaneously to formaldehyde releasers., Material and Methods: A group of 405 patients (308 females and 97 males) was examined in 2011-2013. In all participants patch tests with a series of 13 preservatives (paraben mix, formaldehyde, Quaternium 15, chloromethylisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone mix, methyldibromoglutaronitrile, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, DMDM hydantoin, 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol, iodopropynyl butylcarbamate, benzalkonium chloride, sodium metabisulfite, produced by Chemotechnique Diagnostics, Sweden) were performed., Results: Of the 405 patients 74 (including 52 females) showed positive results of patch tests. Contact allergy to at least 1 preservative was noted in 47 (11.6%) patients, including 34 (11%) females and 13 (13.4%) males. Methylisothiazolinone proved to be the most frequent sensitizer--4.7% (5.2% females, 3.1% males) while parabens, 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol and imidazolidinyl urea (0.2%) were found to be the least frequent. Fourteen (3.4%) participants, 10 women and 4 men, were allergic to formaldehyde and/or formaldehyde releasers. In 11 (78.6%) of them monovalent hypersensitivity was observed. In 13 (3.2% of the examined group) patients allergy to preservatives might have been of occupational origin., Conclusions: Preservatives, particularly isothiazolinones, are significant causal factors of allergic contact dermatitis, including occupational cases. Individuals sensitized to formaldehyde may react simultaneously to formaldehyde releasers, however, such reactions are relatively rare., (This work is available in Open Access model and licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 PL license.)

Background: Nurses are prone to develop hand eczema due to occupational exposure to irritants, including wet work. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of wet work on selected skin properties, reflecting epidermal barrier function--transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and stratum corneum hydration--and additionally skin viscoelasticity, in nurses., Material and Methods: Study subjects included 90 nurses employed in hospital wards. Measurements were carried out within the dorsal aspect of the dominant hand, using a Cutometer MPA 580 equipped with Tewameter TM 300 and Corneometer CM 825 (Courage & Khazaka, Germany) probes. Examina- tions took place on hospital premises. Similar measurements were performed in the control group of females non-exposed to irritants., Results: In the examined group of nurses, mean TEWL was 15.5 g/h/m2 and was higher than in the control group (12.99 g/h/m2). After rejecting the extreme results, the difference between the groups proved to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). The mean value of stratum corneum hydration was lower in the examined group (37.915) compared with the control group (40.05), but the difference was not sta tistically significant. Also results of viscoelasticity assessment showed no significant differences between studied groups., Conclusions: The results of the assessment of skin biophysical properties show that wet work exerts a moderately adverse impact on skin condition. A higher TEWL value and a lower stratum corneum hydration in workers exposed to irritants reflect an adverse impact of these factors on the epidermal barrier function.

Chloromethylisothiazolinone (MCI) and methylisothiazolinone (MI) have been widely used as preservatives in cosmetics, household products and industrial products since the late 1970s. First cases of contact allergy to the MCI/MI combination were noted in 1980-1982 in Sweden. Then, a significant increase in the frequency of sensitization to these compounds was observed in many European centers. The increase has been stopped by the introduction of legislation on their maximum concentrations in consumer and industrial products in Europe and in some non-European countries. But approval of the use of MI alone without limits in industrial products (from 2000) and at a maximum concentration of 100 ppm in cosmetics (from 2005) resulted in an unprecedented increase in the number of individuals sensitized to this compound. Allergic contact dermatitis due to MI occurs in both adults and children. It is often manifested by severe symptoms, which may be also induced by airborne exposure. The most important sources of sensitization include cosmetic products and paints. To counteract the increasing problem of contact allergy epidemic to MI, the recommendations have been developed, suggesting the ban on the use of MI in "leave-on" cosmetics and maximum concentration of 15 ppm in "rinse-off" products. The recommendations are likely to be implemented in 2014.

Various adverse cutaneous reactions may occur as a result of exposure to wood dust or solid woods. These include allergic contact dermatitis, irritant contact dermatitis and, more rarely, contact urticaria, photoallergic and phototoxic reactions. Also cases of erythema multiforme-like reactions have been reported. Contact dermatitis, both allergic and irritant, is most frequently provoked by exotic woods, e.g. wood of the Dalbergia spp., Machaerium scleroxylon or Tectona grandis. Cutaneous reactions are usually associated with manual or machine woodworking, in occupational setting or as a hobby. As a result of exposure to wood dust, airborne contact dermatitis is often diagnosed. Cases of allergic contact dermatitis due to solid woods of finished articles as jewelry or musical instruments have also been reported. The aim of the paper is to present various adverse skin reactions related to exposure to woods, their causal factors and sources of exposure, based on the review of literature.

In recent years occupational skin and respiratory diseases have been more and more frequently diagnosed in small production and service enterprises. The awareness of occupational exposure and its possible health effects among their workers and employers is not sufficient. Beauty salons, in addition to hairdressers and beauticians, frequently employ manicurists and pedicurists. The workers often happen to perform various activities interchangeably. the health status of beauty salons workers has rarely been assessed. The most numerous reports concern hairdressers. In this occupational group, the occurrence of skin lesions induced by wet work and frequent allergy to metals, hair dyes and bleaches and perm solutions has been emphasized, while information about health hazards for being a manicurist or pedicurist in beauty salons is seldom reported. The aim of this paper is to present professional activities (manicure and pedicure, methods of nail stylization), occupational exposure and literature data on work-related adverse health effects in manicurists and pedicurists. Wet work and exposure to solvents, fragrances, resins, metals, gum, detergents may cause skin disorders (contact dermatitis, urticaria, angioedema, photodermatoses), conjunctivitis, anaphylaxis, respiratory tract diseases, including asthma. The discussed occupations are also associated with the increased incidence of bacterial (particularly purulent), viral and fungal infections and cancer.