Contact allergy in Swedish professional ice hockey players.

BACKGROUND: Professional ice hockey players may contract irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. AIMS: To investigate the presence of contact allergy (CA) in professional ice hockey players in Sweden. METHODS: Ten teams from the two top leagues were assessed for potential occupational exposure to sensitizers. Exactly 107 players were patch tested with an extended baseline series and a working series, in total 74 test preparations. The CA rates were compared between the ice hockey players and controls from the general population and dermatitis patients. RESULTS: One out of 4 players had at least one contact allergy. The most common sensitizers were Amerchol L 101, nickel and oxidized limonene. CA was as common in the ice hockey players as in dermatitis patients and significantly more common than in the general population. Fragrances and combined sensitizers in cosmetic products (fragrances + preservatives + emulsifier) were significantly more common in ice hockey players compared with the general population. CONCLUSION: The possible relationship between CA to fragrances and cosmetic products on the one hand and the presence of dermatitis on the other should be explored further.

Results of patch testing with five fragrance materials hitherto not tested: A dose-finding study in the clinical population.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for skin sensitization is used to derive safe use levels of sensitising fragrance ingredients in products. Post-marketing surveillance of the prevalence of contact allergy to these ingredients provides relevant data to help evaluate the performance of these measures. OBJECTIVES: To determine a suitable patch test concentration for five fragrance materials that had hitherto not been tested on a regular basis. These concentrations are then to be used in a surveillance study with patch testing consecutive patients over an extended monitoring period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Furaneol, CAS.3658-77-3; trans-2-hexenal, CAS.6728-26-3; 4,8-dimethyl-4,9-decadienal, CAS.71077-31-1; longifolene, CAS.475-20-7; benzaldehyde, CAS.10052-7, were patch tested with other fragrance allergens in four clinics. Patch testing was conducted in three rounds, starting with the lowest concentrations of the five ingredients. The doses were increased in the subsequent rounds if no late-appearing positive reactions and virtually no irritant reactions were reported. RESULTS: Overall, 373 patients were tested. No positive allergic reaction was reported to the five ingredients. Patch test results of other fragrance allergens are reported. CONCLUSIONS: The highest test concentrations are each considered safe for patch testing consecutive patients. Further surveillance based on these preparations will evaluate the hypothesis that QRA-driven consumer product levels of these fragrances can prevent sensitization.

Occupational exposure to epoxy components and risk of dermatitis: A registry-based follow-up study of the wind turbine industry.

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact allergy and dermatitis are frequently reported among epoxy-exposed workers. OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk of dermatitis associated with epoxy exposure. METHODS: We followed 825 epoxy-exposed and 1091 non-exposed blue-collar workers, and 493 white-collar workers of a Danish wind turbine blade factory during 2017-2022 with linked data from national health registers on diagnoses, patch testing, or fillings of prescriptions for topical corticosteroids. Incidence rate ratios of dermatitis or a first-time topical corticosteroid prescription were estimated with Poisson regression using non-exposed blue-collar workers as reference. We similarly estimated incidence rate ratios for the duration of epoxy exposure and current epoxy exposure. RESULTS: Epoxy-exposed blue-collar workers showed a dermatitis incidence rate of 2.1 per 100 000 person days, a two-fold increased risk of dermatitis and a 20% increased risk of filling a prescription for topical corticosteroids. Incidence rate ratios were higher during early exposure and declined with further exposure for both outcomes. White-collar workers had generally lower risks. CONCLUSION: We observed an increased risk of dermatitis following epoxy exposure confirming previous case reports and cross-sectional studies emphasizing the need for intensified focus on preventive efforts for this group of workers.