Position paper: Telemedicine in occupational dermatology - current status and perspectives.

Teledermatology is the use of telecommunication technologies to exchange medical information for diagnosis, consultation, treatment and teaching in dermatology. While its use has been evaluated in a wide range of dermatological diagnoses, only few studies exist on its validity, diagnostic precision, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness in occupational dermatology. However, these studies show a considerable potential for diagnosis, prevention, treatment support and follow-up of patients with occupational skin diseases. Asynchronous (store and forward; SAF) or synchronous dermatology teleconsults could assist occupational medicine specialists not only in occupational preventive care, but also in the context of skin cancer screening in outdoor workers. Thus, teledermatology might contribute to earlier prevention and notification of occupational skin diseases. Modern smartphone apps with artificial intelligence technologies may also facilitate self-monitoring in employees working in high-risk jobs.

Cooperation between the occupational health insurance and physicians practicing occupational dermatology: optimization potential in quality assurance.

BACKGROUND: Quality assurance is a task of the medical profession, but it is also a duty of the occupational health insurance (OHI). Data on the interaction quality between physicians practicing occupational dermatology and the OHI are limited. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An online survey was performed in 854 German members of the Working Group on Occupational and Environmental Dermatology in October 2013. Items included demographic data, a judgment on the cooperation between the dermatologists and OHI companies, an economic grading of the current compensation scheme, and prioritization of optimization tasks. RESULTS: 182 members (21.3 % of the invited population) participated in the survey. The cooperation with the OHI companies was judged as "very good" by 10.8 %, as "good" by 56.7  %, as "satisfactory" by 24.2 %, as "sufficient" by 7.0 % and as "inadequate" by 1.3 %. 93.4 % of the interviewed mentioned problems and improvement potentials in the cooperation of their practice or clinic with OHI companies. Main points of criticisms were reimbursement (44.7 %), followed by impairments of the treatment options (36.5 %) and the delay or scope of the treatment in the dermatologist's procedure (29.4 %). CONCLUSIONS: While most physicians practicing occupational dermatology give a positive judgment of their cooperation with OHI companies, quality optimization potentials exist regarding the reimbursement of dermatological services, especially regarding time-intensive counselling in the prevention of occupational skin diseases, in the enablement of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures according to current guidelines and in a timely preventive intervention to use the therapeutic window before chronification of skin diseases may occur.

Guideline on allergen immunotherapy in IgE-mediated allergic diseases: S2K Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), Society of Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), Austrian Society of Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI), Swiss Society for Allergology and Immunology (SSAI), German Dermatological Society (DDG), German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), Society of Pediatric Pulmonology (GPP), German Respiratory Society (DGP), German Professional Association of Otolaryngologists (BVHNO), German Association of Paediatric and Adolescent Care Specialists (BVKJ), Federal Association of Pneumologists, Sleep and Respiratory Physicians (BdP), Professional Association of German Dermatologists (BVDD).

Not available.

10 years quality assurance of the dermatologist's procedure. ABD review board part II: 2003-2009.

BACKGROUND: The dermatologist's procedure ("procedure for early detection of occupational skin diseases") enables dermatologists to conduct the relevant diagnostics at the expenses of the statutory employers' liability insurance funds (UVT) if there is a possibility of a work-related skin disorder in an employee. Acceptance of this most relevant tool for secondary prevention in occupational dermatology in Germany is high and most dermatologists make careful use of this unparalleled privilege. However, there have been occasional complaints by the UVT, concerning overly extensive diagnostics. Consequently, the Task Force on Occupational and Environmental Dermatology (ABD) of the German Society of Dermatology set up a review board in May 1999. RESULTS: Dermatologists' reports in question were submitted by the UVT to the review board and reviewed separately by two experienced occupational dermatologists both in the 1(st) period (1999-2003) and now in the second period (June 2003 - November 2009). The criticism of the reviewers was mostly directed towards the number of tests and an insufficient documentation in the dermatologist's report. There were 69 dermatologists' reports submitted to the review board (as compared to 155 in the 1(st) period). CONCLUSIONS: The decreased number of dermatologists' reports submitted could be a result of the review process itself. Other factors may include the optimization of the dermatologist's report with a better reimbursement as well as the recent publication of guidelines and continuous education in occupational dermatology with certification of more than 700 dermatologists. These measures of quality assurance are aimed to further optimize the dermatologist's procedure and to allow for improved and more rapid care for patients with occupational dermatoses by dermatologists.

White paper on peanut allergy - part 1: Epidemiology, burden of disease, health economic aspects.

Peanuts are Leguminosae, commonly known as the legume or pea family, and peanut allergy is among the most common food allergies and the most common cause of fatal food reactions and anaphylaxis. The prevalence of peanut allergy increased 3.5-fold over the past two decades reaching 1.4-2% in Europe and the United States. The reasons for this increase in prevalence are likely multifaceted. Sensitization via the skin appears to be associated with the development of peanut allergy and atopic eczema in infancy is associated with a high risk of developing peanut allergy. Until recently, the only possible management strategy for peanut allergy was strict allergen avoidance and emergency treatment including adrenaline auto-injector in cases of accidental exposure and reaction. This paper discusses the various factors that impact the risks of peanut allergy and the burden of self-management on peanut-allergic children and their caregivers.

Severe allergic reactions after COVID-19 vaccination with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in Great Britain and USA: Position statement of the German Allergy Societies: Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) and Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA).

Two employees of the National Health Service (NHS) in England developed severe allergic reactions following administration of BNT162b2 vaccine against COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). The British SmPC for the BNT162b2 vaccine already includes reference to a contraindication for use in individuals who have had an allergic reaction to the vaccine or any of its components. As a precautionary measure, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has issued interim guidance to the NHS not to vaccinate in principle in "patients with severe allergies". Allergic reactions to vaccines are very rare, but vaccine components are known to cause allergic reactions. BNT162b2 is a vaccine based on an mRNA embedded in lipid nanoparticles and blended with other substances to enable its transport into the cells. In the pivotal phase III clinical trial, the BNT162b2 vaccine was generally well tolerated, but this large clinical trial, used to support vaccine approval by the MHRA and US Food and Drug Administration, excluded individuals with a "history of a severe adverse reaction related to the vaccine and/or a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to a component of the study medication". Vaccines are recognized as one of the most effective public health interventions. This repeated administration of a foreign protein (antigen) necessitates a careful allergological history before each application and diagnostic clarification and a risk-benefit assessment before each injection. Severe allergic reactions to vaccines are rare but can be life-threatening, and it is prudent to raise awareness of this hazard among vaccination teams and to take adequate precautions while more experience is gained with this new vaccine.

Immunologically relevant aspects of the new COVID-19 vaccines-an ÖGAI (Austrian Society for Allergology and Immunology) and AeDA (German Society for Applied Allergology) position paper.

BACKGROUND: The vaccines against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) approved in the European Union represent a decisive step in the fight against the pandemic. The application of these available vaccines to patients with pre-existing immunological conditions leads to a multitude of questions regarding efficacy, side effects and the necessary patient information. RESULTS: This review article provides insight into mechanisms of action of the currently available severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines and summarises the current state of science as well as expert recommendations regarding tolerability of the vaccines. In addition, the potential to develop protective immune responses is determined. A special focus is given on patients under immunosuppression or in treatment with immunomodulatory drugs. Special groups of the population such as children, pregnant women and the elderly are also considered. CONCLUSION: Despite the need for a patient-specific risk-benefit assessment, the consensus among experts is that patients with immunological diseases in particular benefit from the induced immune protection after COVID-19 vaccination and do not have an increased risk of side effects.

Use of biologicals in allergic and type-2 inflammatory diseases during the current COVID-19 pandemic: Position paper of Ärzteverband Deutscher Allergologen (AeDA)A, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Klinische Immunologie (DGAKI)B, Gesellschaft für Pädiatrische Allergologie und Umweltmedizin (GPA)C, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (ÖGAI)D, Luxemburgische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (LGAI)E, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Pneumologie (ÖGP)F in co-operation with the German, Austrian, and Swiss ARIA groupsG, and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases has faced major challenges. Recommendations for "social distancing" and the fear of patients becoming infected during a visit to a medical facility have led to a drastic decrease in personal doctor-patient contacts. This affects both acute care and treatment of the chronically ill. The immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection is so far only insufficiently understood and could be altered in a favorable or unfavorable way by therapy with monoclonal antibodies. There is currently no evidence for an increased risk of a severe COVID-19 course in allergic patients. Many patients are under ongoing therapy with biologicals that inhibit type 2 immune responses via various mechanisms. There is uncertainty about possible immunological interactions and potential risks of these biologicals in the case of an infection with SARS-CoV-2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A selective literature search was carried out in PubMed, Livivo, and the internet to cover the past 10 years (May 2010 - April 2020). Additionally, the current German-language publications were analyzed. Based on these data, the present position paper provides recommendations for the biological treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: In order to maintain in-office consultation services, a safe treatment environment must be created that is adapted to the pandemic situation. To date, there is a lack of reliable study data on the care for patients with complex respiratory, atopic, and allergic diseases in times of an imminent infection risk from SARS-CoV-2. Type-2-dominant immune reactions, as they are frequently seen in allergic patients, could influence various phases of COVID-19, e.g., by slowing down the immune reactions. Theoretically, this could have an unfavorable effect in the early phase of a SARS-Cov-2 infection, but also a positive effect during a cytokine storm in the later phase of severe courses. However, since there is currently no evidence for this, all data from patients treated with a biological directed against type 2 immune reactions who develop COVID-19 should be collected in registries, and their disease courses documented in order to be able to provide experience-based instructions in the future. CONCLUSION: The use of biologicals for the treatment of bronchial asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and spontaneous urticaria should be continued as usual in patients without suspected infection or proven SARS-CoV-2 infection. If available, it is recommended to prefer a formulation for self-application and to offer telemedical monitoring. Treatment should aim at the best possible control of difficult-to-control allergic and atopic diseases using adequate rescue and add-on therapy and should avoid the need for systemic glucocorticosteroids. If SARS-CoV-2 infection is proven or reasonably suspected, the therapy should be determined by weighing the benefits and risks individually for the patient in question, and the patient should be involved in the decision-making. It should be kept in mind that the potential effects of biologicals on the immune response in COVID-19 are currently not known. Telemedical offers are particularly desirable for the acute consultation needs of suitable patients.

Allergen immunotherapy in the current COVID-19 pandemic: A position paper of AeDA, ARIA, EAACI, DGAKI and GPA: Position paper of the German ARIA GroupA in cooperation with the Austrian ARIA GroupB, the Swiss ARIA GroupC, German Society for Applied Allergology (AEDA)D, German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI)E, Society for Pediatric Allergology (GPA)F in cooperation with AG Clinical Immunology, Allergology and Environmental Medicine of the DGHNO-KHCG and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H.

No abstract available.

ARIA guideline 2019: treatment of allergic rhinitis in the German health system.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients affected by allergies is increasing worldwide. The resulting allergic diseases are leading to significant costs for health care and social systems. Integrated care pathways are needed to enable comprehensive care within the national health systems. The ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) initiative develops internationally applicable guidelines for allergic respiratory diseases. METHODS: ARIA serves to improve the care of patients with allergies and chronic respiratory diseases. In collaboration with other international initiatives, national associations and patient organizations in the field of allergies and respiratory diseases, real-life integrated care pathways have been developed for a digitally assisted, integrative, individualized treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) with comorbid asthma. In the present work, these integrated care pathways have been adapted to the German situation and health system. RESULTS: The present ICP (integrated care pathway) guideline covers key areas of the care of AR patients with and without asthma. It includes the views of patients and other healthcare providers. DISCUSSION: A comprehensive ICP guideline can reflect real-life care better than traditional guideline models.

Tacrolimus ointment in the treatment of occupationally induced chronic hand dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Occupational hand dermatitis (OHD) is a common and often chronic condition. Usage of topical corticosteroids is limited in long-term therapy because of potential side-effects. New treatment options are highly appreciated. OBJECTIVE: To study efficacy and safety of tacrolimus in patients suffering from OHD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective, open, multicentre study, 29 patients with OHD of predominantly mild-to-moderate severity were treated with tacrolimus ointment (Protopic 0.1%) during a 4-week active treatment period with twice daily application followed by a 2-month optional treatment period. Efficacy was evaluated by the use of a standardized hand eczema score and by clinical severity rating, conducted on all study visits (screening, baseline and weeks 2, 4, 6, and 12). Adverse events were recorded for safety evaluation. RESULTS: The hand eczema score declined significantly after 2 weeks of treatment compared with baseline and further declined until the end of the study. Finally, 12 (44%) patients were clear of hand eczema. Worsening of the dermatitis occurred in 2 patients (7%). Clinical grading indicated improvement too. Overall tolerability was good. CONCLUSION: Topical tacrolimus might be an efficacious treatment option for chronic OHD. Blinded and randomized controlled studies are necessary to confirm the results of this pilot study.