Search

Background: Allergic contact dermatitis caused by rubber allergens is common, and causes significant patient morbidity. Contemporary data are important to allow appropriate preventive measures and identification of contact allergy trends., Objectives: To describe the pattern of patch test reactivity to rubber allergens, including those in the European baseline series., Methods: Data collected by the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) network between 2009 and 2012 from 12 European countries were analysed., Results: Contact allergy to thiuram mix declined over the studied time period, with an overall prevalence of 1.87%. The prevalence of allergy to carba mix was 2.29%, and was significantly increasing. Prevalence rates of sensitization to other rubber allergens were largely unchanged. Statistical analysis with the MOAHLFA index confirmed the strong links between rubber allergy and occupational hand dermatitis., Conclusions: Changing patterns of allergy to rubber additives have been identified. Inclusion of carba mix in the European baseline series may be appropriate., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

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.)

Objectives: To evaluate sensitization to chemicals present in work environment after an outbreak of contact dermatitis in workers of vehicle equipment factory, exposed to polyurethane foam, based on 4,4'-diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI)., Material and Methods: From among 300 employees, 21 individuals reporting work-related skin and/or respiratory tract symptoms underwent clinical examination, patch testing, skin prick tests, spirometry and MDI sIgE measurement in serum. Patch tests included isocyanates series, selected rubber additives, metals, fragrances, preservatives, and an antiadhesive agent., Results: Clinical examination revealed current eczema in the area of hands and/or forearms in 10 workers. Positive patch test reactions were found in 10 individuals, the most frequent to diaminodiphenylmethane and 4-phenylenediamine (7 persons). Reactions to an antiadhesive agent were assessed as irritant (5 workers). Except for sensitization to common aeroallergens, no significant abnormalities were found in the remaining tests. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis was diagnosed in 7 workers, irritant contact dermatitis in 10 and coexisiting allergic and irritant contact dermatitis in 3 workers., Conclusions: In workers manufacturing products from polyurethane foam, attention should be paid to the risk of developing contact dermatitis. Skin problems in our study group were attributable probably to insufficient protection of the skin.

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.