Epidemiological case-control study on contact sensitisation in female foot care specialists with occupational contact dermatitis: Patch test data of the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2008 to 2022.

BACKGROUND: Mainly women work as foot care specialists (FCS). They are at risk to develop occupational dermatitis (OD). OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to describe the contact sensitisation pattern of female FCS with OD. METHODS: In a retrospective study, patch test and clinical data collected by the Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) from 2008 to 2022 were analysed. Data of 116 female FCS with OD were compared with data of 13 930 female patients with OD working in other professions and 78 612 female patients without OD. RESULTS: Hand dermatitis (93.1%) was significantly more common and face dermatitis (0.9%) significantly less common in female FCS with OD compared to other female patients with or without OD. Frequent suspected allergen sources were disinfectants, gloves, leave-on and nail cosmetics. Occlusion and wetness were important co-factors. The most common diagnoses were irritant contact dermatitis (26.7%) and allergic contact dermatitis (21.6%). No sensitisation to any of the baseline series allergens was significantly more frequent in female FCS with OD than in the two control groups. However, sensitisations to allergens which FCS are abundantly exposed to, including fragrances, preservatives, rubber ingredients and disinfectants, were most common. CONCLUSIONS: FCS should be aware of the OD risk and prevention should be promoted.

Irritant potential of different washing procedures used for heavy-duty soiling: Short and intense or longer and mild?

BACKGROUND: To prevent irritant contact eczema even in occupational fields with heavy-duty soiling, it is generally recommended to use 'mild' hand cleansers (mild detergent without grits, MC). On the other hand, since grit-containing cleansers (GC) show a higher washing power that minimizes washing time, their usage is generally preferred in specific occupational fields. OBJECTIVES: To compare whether a shorter, intense washing period might cause less skin damage than a longer washing period with an MC. METHODS: Differences in cleaning time were first verified in a pilot study using standardized model dirt. In the main study, the forearms of 35 healthy volunteers were washed with three standardized procedures over a period of 3 days, either using 2 min of MC with/without hand brush or 1-min GC. Clinical scoring, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), corneometry, colourimetry and scaliness/roughness (Visioscan) were used to evaluate the epidermal barrier, topography and irritation. RESULTS: The pre-study showed that washing time doubled when using MC vs. GC. Using GC resulted in stronger barrier disruption, even after a shorter washing period - median ΔT4-T1 TEWL 0.96 g/m2 /h vs. 4.91 g/m2 /h respectively, p < 0.0001. The most harmful procedure for the skin was the additional application of a hand brush (18.86 g/m2 /h). CONCLUSIONS: Short-time washing with GC damages the skin barrier more significantly in comparison to a longer application of an MC. When washing with MC, the strongest irritant reaction occurred when accompanied with hand brushing.

Applying skin protective cream and the wearing of gloves?-A randomized controlled experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Glove occlusion might enhance skin sensitivity to a subsequent detergent challenge (occlusion effect). Thus, some skin protection creams (PC) claim to protect against this effect of occlusion, and are recommended to be used before wearing liquid-proof gloves. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of PC applied prior to glove occlusion on the 'occlusion effect'-refers to increased susceptibility of the skin to a model detergent. METHODS: One hundred and eleven volunteers were enrolled in a single-blind, randomized study. Seven PCs were applied before glove occlusion over 7 days (D1-D7). After sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS) challenge, we compared the irritation between the areas treated with PC and occlusion alone. Clinical scoring and bioengineering methods (capacitance, transepidermal water loss [TEWL], and colourimetry [erythema]) were used to quantify the irritant reactions. RESULTS: After 1 week of occlusion and PC application, we did not observe significant changes in TEWL, nor in erythema, whereas skin hydration raised in three cream-treated areas. On day 10, after a challenge with SLS, some products significantly aggravated the skin irritation as compared to occlusion alone. CONCLUSIONS: The 'occlusion effect'-shown as higher skin susceptibility to a model detergent-was not mitigated by PCs when applied prior to glove occlusion. On the contrary, some PCs might have negative effects on skin barrier function and augment such sensitivity.

The benefit of late readings in patch testing depends both on allergen and patient characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Patch test (PT) readings are recommended after 48 h and 72 h (D3). An additional day 7 (D7) reading has been suggested by some, although data on efficient patient selection are scarce. We investigated positive D7 reactions regarding (i) allergens in the baseline series and additional PT series of the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (DKG) and (ii) characteristics of the patients tested. METHODS: Retrospective, multicentre analysis of 190 allergens derived from 17 DKG test series in 4687 patients with an additional D7 reading. Patients were patch tested with the baseline series and additional series, if required. Occurrence of novel D7 reactions as well as increasing skin reactions from D3 to D7 was analysed separately. RESULTS: Depending on the allergen tested, waiving D7 readings would have missed 4.4-26.8% of positive PT results. Patch test series with the highest number of novel D7 reactions were baseline series, metal series, and leather/shoe series. New positive reactions on D7 were associated with age over 50 years and with a negative irritant control containing sodium lauryl sulphate. Of note, application of the PT allergens for 48 h instead of 24 h was positively associated with late PT reactions. CONCLUSION: Within the most frequently tested allergens, without late readings, on average 11.7% of sensitizations would have been missed. Novel late reacting allergens were identified. This study comprehensively dissects patient-, allergen- and test-dependent parameters in support for D7 readings. We propose to always consider late readings individually based on effort-benefit considerations.

Skin symptoms in veterinary assistant staff and veterinarians: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Veterinary assistants and veterinarians are at an increased risk of developing an occupational skin disease, for example, irritant/allergic contact dermatitis, contact urticaria and hand eczema (HE). OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate the prevalence of skin problems and the influence of predisposing factors especially among veterinary assistants. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study among veterinary assistant staff (n = 103) and veterinarians (n = 19). A questionnaire, specific IgE determination and photographs of hands were evaluated for skin symptoms. Logistic regression models assessed predisposing factors. RESULTS: Over 50% (n = 62/122) of our study population reported hand eczema (HE) in the last 12 months (1-year prevalence). Twenty-seven subjects reported redness and contact urticaria directly after animal contact, 35 had a positive history of allergic contact dermatitis. HE was associated with (i) increased frequency of hand washing (11-15 times per day; OR 4.15, confidence interval [CI] 95% 1.18-14.6, p = 0.027, univariate model) and (ii) unprotected contact to fluids and tensides >5 times per day (OR 4.56, CI 95% 1.53-13.6, multivariate model). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a high prevalence of self-reported HE among staff in veterinary practices. Excessive hand washing, unprotected contact with irritants and long-term glove use should be avoided.

Contact sensitization in metalworkers: Data from the information network of departments of dermatology (IVDK), 2010-2018.

BACKGROUND: Metalworkers are exposed to a variety of contact allergens by handling tools, metals, metalworking fluids (MWFs), oils and greases, rubber materials, and so on. Most large-scale reports on contact allergy due to MWFs are more than 10-years-old, and there are only few studies on contact allergy in mechanics and other metal workers not exposed to MWFs. OBJECTIVES: To describe a current spectrum of contact sensitization in metalworkers with occupational dermatitis (OD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patch test data collected by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK; 2010-2018), stratifying for 804 cutting metalworkers, 2197 mechanics, and 355 other metalworkers. RESULTS: Cutting metalworkers were most frequently sensitized to monoethanolamine (12.6%), colophonium/abietic acid (11.4%) and formaldehyde releasers (up to 8.5%) from the MWF series, and formaldehyde (4.6%) and iodopropynyl butylcarbamate (4.6%) from the baseline series. Sensitization among mechanics and other metalworkers indicates possible occupational exposure to MWFs, glues, and resins, although this may not be expected from their job titles. CONCLUSIONS: The spectrum of MWF contact allergens remained largely unchanged during the last years. Taking a comprehensive occupational history is indispensable in order to not miss relevant allergen exposures.

Revised nomenclature and classification of inherited ichthyoses: results of the First Ichthyosis Consensus Conference in Sorèze 2009.

BACKGROUND: Inherited ichthyoses belong to a large, clinically and etiologically heterogeneous group of mendelian disorders of cornification, typically involving the entire integument. Over the recent years, much progress has been made defining their molecular causes. However, there is no internationally accepted classification and terminology. OBJECTIVE: We sought to establish a consensus for the nomenclature and classification of inherited ichthyoses. METHODS: The classification project started at the First World Conference on Ichthyosis in 2007. A large international network of expert clinicians, skin pathologists, and geneticists entertained an interactive dialogue over 2 years, eventually leading to the First Ichthyosis Consensus Conference held in Sorèze, France, on January 23 and 24, 2009, where subcommittees on different issues proposed terminology that was debated until consensus was reached. RESULTS: It was agreed that currently the nosology should remain clinically based. "Syndromic" versus "nonsyndromic" forms provide a useful major subdivision. Several clinical terms and controversial disease names have been redefined: eg, the group caused by keratin mutations is referred to by the umbrella term, "keratinopathic ichthyosis"-under which are included epidermolytic ichthyosis, superficial epidermolytic ichthyosis, and ichthyosis Curth-Macklin. "Autosomal recessive congenital ichthyosis" is proposed as an umbrella term for the harlequin ichthyosis, lamellar ichthyosis, and the congenital ichthyosiform erythroderma group. LIMITATIONS: As more becomes known about these diseases in the future, modifications will be needed. CONCLUSION: We have achieved an international consensus for the classification of inherited ichthyosis that should be useful for all clinicians and can serve as reference point for future research.

Occupational UV-Exposure is a Major Risk Factor for Basal Cell Carcinoma: Results of the Population-Based Case-Control Study FB-181.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the role of occupational and nonoccupational ultraviolet (UV)-exposure concerning the development of basal cell carcinoma (BCC). METHODS: We undertook a population-based multicenter case-control study. Patients with first incident BCC (n = 836) were propensity score matched by age and sex to controls without skin cancer (n = 836). Sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and lifetime UV-exposure were assessed by trained investigators. The differential estimation of occupational and nonoccupational UV-exposure dosages was based on validated instruments and established reference values. Associations were assessed using multivariable-adjusted conditional logistic regression models. RESULTS: Individuals with high levels of occupational UV-exposure were at significantly increased BCC-risk compared with individuals with low [odds ratio (OR) 1.84; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.19 to 2.83 and moderate (OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.20 to 3.22) occupational UV-exposure. Nonoccupational UV-exposure was not independently associated with BCC. CONCLUSION: Skin cancer prevention strategies should be expanded to the occupational setting.