Self-reported hand symptoms: a role in monitoring health care workers for latex sensitization?

BACKGROUND: The use of powdered natural rubber latex (NRL) gloves increased greatly in the 1980s because of concerns about transmission of blood-borne infections and the subsequent implementation of universal precautions. The most common clinical reactions to glove use are irritant and T-cell-mediated contact dermatitis. However, IgE-mediated immediate reactions to latex have become a serious concern for health care workers (HCWs). The diagnosis of latex allergy requires a comprehensive medical history and diagnostic tests. The skin prick test is the preferred diagnostic method, although it can be time-consuming. OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of hand symptoms reported on questionnaires in monitoring HCWs for latex sensitization. METHODS: Questionnaires were completed by 804 HCWs at 2 hospitals. Using a positive skin prick test (SPT) result as a criterion standard of latex sensitization, the diagnostic performance of hand symptoms was evaluated. RESULTS: Increasing latex glove use was strongly related to increasing reports of hand symptoms. Hand symptoms were highly associated with glove-related respiratory and systemic symptoms. A positive SPT result was seen in 5% of HCWs and increased with the number of hand symptoms: 0 (1.6%), 1 to 2 (3.4%), and 3 to 7 (19.0%). Participants reporting more than 2 hand symptoms were 11 times more likely to have positive SPT results compared with those with 2 or fewer hand symptoms. CONCLUSION: Hand symptoms are closely associated with latex sensitization. Questionnaires should be useful in health monitoring for HCWs who use latex gloves.

Analysis of available diagnostic tests for latex sensitization in an at-risk population.

BACKGROUND: Lack of a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved skin testing reagent for latex allergy in the United States requires reliance on patient history and serologic assays for diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of an FDA-cleared antilatex IgE serology test and an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with various sources of latex protein antigens in an at-risk but unselected population of health care workers. METHODS: Health care workers underwent duplicate latex and serologic testing for latex specific IgE with the CAP assay and ELISA from June 1, 1998, through December 31, 2002. Logistic regression with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis determined the values, resulting in 98% and 99% specificity for the CAP assay and ELISA, respectively. RESULTS: Results of paired skin and serologic tests were available for 792 participants. Forty duplicate skin test results (5%) were positive. For the CAP assay, sensitivity was 35%; specificity, 98%; positive predictive value, 48.3%; and negative predictive value, 96.6%. ELISA demonstrated similar results. Multivariable logistic regression yielding a 98% or 99% specificity for the various ELISAs demonstrated that the adjusted odds of a positive skin test result significantly increased with positive CAP assay and ELISA results using a powdered glove extract. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the FDA-cleared antilatex IgE serologic test for latex allergy has much lower sensitivity than previously reported. This finding confirms that this serologic test should be used only for patients with a history of latex allergy and not for screening the population with a low prevalence of latex sensitization.

Prevention of IgE Sensitization to Latex in Health Care Workers After Reduction of Antigen Exposures.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate occupational latex allergy in health care workers (HCWs) before and after an intervention designed to reduce latex allergen exposure from gloves. METHODS: Latex antigen concentrations in work area air ducts were measured before the intervention. Symptoms and latex sensitization were monitored annually before and after the intervention in 805 HCWs, using questionnaires and skin prick testing. RESULTS: The prevalence of latex sensitization before the intervention correlated with air duct latex antigen measurements, for HCWs exposed to low (9/413, 2%), intermediate (23/292, 8%), and high (11/67, 16%) antigen levels, P < 0.0001. After the intervention, new latex sensitization rates declined 16-fold, and 25% of previously sensitized employees reverted to negative skin tests. CONCLUSION: Airborne antigen exposure is a major source of latex sensitization among HCWs. Use of powder-free latex gloves markedly reduces the risk of sensitization.