Moisturizers and Cleansers in the Management of Skin Conditions Caused by Personal Protective Equipment and Frequent Handwashing.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, prolonged usage of personal protective equipment (PPE) and frequent handwashing has exacerbated or caused skin diseases, particularly amongst frontline workers. Skin conditions, such as atopic dermatitis, irritant contact dermatitis, and hand eczema, affect patients' quality of life and their ability to work. These conditions can be managed by frequent moisturization and washing with gentle cleansers. In this review, we discuss the properties of effective moisturizers and cleansers for patients with skin diseases related to enhanced infection control procedures.

Dermatological manifestations associated with COVID-19: A comprehensive review of the current knowledge.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a significant health problem globally. The virus has spread widely and become a global pandemic. The pathophysiology for SARS-CoV-2 has not been explained clearly. It has been associated with several multiorgan symptoms, among which its dermatological manifestations are of great interest. Primarily, there has been no report of skin features among COVID-19 patients. Nevertheless, recently there have been several reports regarding COVID-19 patients who presented with cutaneous manifestations. In the current review, we focus on the various cutaneous manifestations of COVID-19 infection.

Occupational contact dermatitis: Return to work using a multidisciplinary clinic model.

BACKGROUND: Occupational contact dermatitis often results in work disruption. Return-to-work (RTW) is an important outcome. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine RTW outcomes and factors associated with such outcomes using a multidisciplinary clinic model. METHODS: Chart abstraction was performed for 194 workers who received RTW assistance over a 6-year period. Elements abstracted included demographic and diagnostic information and information about the RTW program including principles, program components, barriers, and facilitators. RESULTS: Of the 902 workers seen for dermatologic assessment, 194 received RTW assistance. At initial assessment, 37% were not working because of their skin disease, and at follow-up, 7% were not working because of their skin disease. The RTW plan components included a graduated or trial of RTW, specific recommendations for avoiding exposure, personal protective equipment, skin management, and ongoing skin monitoring. Principles associated with successful RTW included good communication and the availability of modified work and a worker adherence to the plan. Barriers included lack of modified work, unresponsive employers, and ongoing skin problems. CONCLUSIONS: Specific approaches are important to identify if RTW is to be successful for workers with occupational contact dermatitis.

Occupational dermatitis to facial personal protective equipment in health care workers: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged wear of facial protective equipment can lead to occupational dermatoses. OBJECTIVE: To identify important causes of occupational dermatoses from facial protective equipment. METHODS: A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed using PubMed and Embase databases. Articles were included if they reported occupational dermatoses caused by surgical/procedure masks or N95 respirators, or both. RESULTS: We identified 344 articles, and 16 were suitable for inclusion in this review. Selected articles focused on facial occupational dermatoses in health care workers. Allergic contact dermatitis to the elastic straps, glue, and formaldehyde released from the mask fabric was reported. Irritant contact dermatitis was common on the cheeks and nasal bridge due to pressure and friction. Irritant dermatitis was associated with personal history of atopic dermatitis and prolonged mask wear (>6 hours). Acneiform eruption was reported due to prolonged wear and occlusion. Contact urticaria was rare. LIMITATIONS: Only publications listed in PubMed or Embase were included. Most publications were case reports and retrospective studies. CONCLUSION: This systematic review from members of the American Contact Dermatitis Society highlights cases of occupational dermatitis to facial protective equipment, including potential offending allergens. This work may help in the diagnosis and treatment of health care workers with facial occupational dermatitis.

Clinical Manifestations, Treatment, and Prevention of Acute Irritant Contact Dermatitis Caused by 2,4-Dichloro-5-Methylpyrimidine.

BACKGROUND: There are no reported cases of 2,4-dichloro-5-methylpyrimidine (DCP)-induced irritant contact dermatitis (ICD). OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to summarize the clinical features, treatment, and protective measures for DCP-induced ICD. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data from 64 patients with DCP-induced ICD and the protective measures in a DCP manufacturing factory. RESULTS: Disease onset occurred 1 to 10 minutes after DCP single exposure in all 64 patients. The contact site developed edematous erythematous skin lesions with clear boundaries. Other symptoms included a burning sensation (n = 48), pruritus (n = 16), headache (n = 4), nausea/vomiting (n = 3), and syncope (n = 1). Ten patients developed pruritic rash over the whole body 1 to 4 days after contacting DCP. Histopathologic examination of the lesions was performed in 8 patients; all 8 showed manifestations of ICD. A patch test with 1% DCP ethanol solution was performed in 7 patients. One patient withdrew because of pruritus and massive erythema over the whole body. Four patients had a strong reaction, and 2 patients had a very strong reaction. All patients were cured. Positive-pressure inflatable protective clothing protected workers from the outside environment to prevent DCP-induced ICD. CONCLUSIONS: 2,4-Dichloro-5-methylpyrimidine exposure induces acute ICD and a delayed allergic reaction in some patients (15.6%). Positive-pressure inflatable protective clothing prevents DCP-induced ICD.

Contact Dermatitis from Hand Hygiene Practices in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread globally at a staggering speed. At present, there is no effective treatment or vaccine for COVID-19. Hand disinfection is a cost-effective way to prevent its transmission. According to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, we should wash our hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. If soap and water are not readily available, alcohol-based hand rubs (ABHRs) with at least 60% alcohol are the alternative. With diligent hand disinfection reinforced during COVID-19, there is an increased prevalence of contact dermatitis. This commentary highlights the fact that contact dermatitis is a readily treatable condition and should not cause any deviation of proper hand hygiene. In irritant contact dermatitis (ICD), the management strategies are selection of less irritating hand hygiene products, frequent use of moisturisers to rebuild the skin barrier, and education on proper hand hygiene practices. In allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), the identification and avoidance of the contact allergen is the key to treatment. However, ACD is less common and only accounts for 20% of the cases. The identified allergens in hand cleansers are predominantly preservative excipients and ACD attributable to ABHR are very uncommon. Alcohol-free hand rubs are widely available on the market but it is not a recommended alternative to ABHRs by the CDC.

Evaluation of skin problems and dermatology life quality index in health care workers who use personal protection measures during COVID-19 pandemic.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the skin problems and dermatological life quality of the health care workers (HCWs) due to personal protection equipment (PPE) use, who are at high risk for COVID-19 infection. A questionnaire about HCWs' PPE use, their skin symptoms, and prevention, management methods and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was fulfilled. The median age of 440 participants was 33.5 (21.0-65.0) years old. Skin problems were found to be 90.2%, the most common were dryness, itching, cracking, burning, flaking, peeling and lichenification. The presence of skin problems (P < .001) was higher in those who did not use moisturizers. Of all, 22.3% (n = 98) stated that the use of PPE increased the severity of their previously diagnosed skin diseases and allergies (P < .01). Only 28.0% (n = 123) stated that they know the skin symptoms that may develop by using PPE. The proper hand washing rate was higher as education level increased (P < .001). Skin problems were higher in those using mask with metal nose bridge (P: .02 and P: .003, respectively). As the mask using period prolonged, acne was more common (P: .02). DLQI was significantly affected in women (P = .003), and with increased skin problems related to PPE (P < .001). It is important to organize trainings on prevention and management of possible skin symptoms due to PPE use according to guidelines.

[Allergy to isothiazolinones in recent years]. / Alergia na izotiazolinony w ostatnich latach.

BACKGROUND: Isothiazolinones are preservatives which are present in cosmetics, household chemicals and many other industrial products. Initially, a mixture of methylchloroisothiazolinone and methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI - Kathon CG) was used, and then, from the beginning of the 21st century, only methylisothiazolinone. Due to a significant increase in the number of contact dermatitis caused by allergy to this compound, it was withdrawn from leave-on cosmetics, and its concentration in rinse-off cosmetics was reduced. The aim of the study was to analyze the incidence of contact allergy to isothiazolinones among patients in the Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine, Lódz, the intensification of patch test results and hypersensitivity depending on the occupation, and to assess the contribution of immediate allergy to the occurrence of that hypersensitivity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a group of 1137 patients (832 females and 305 males) with suspected contact dermatitis, diagnosed in 2014-2018, patch tests series including methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (0.01%) and methylisothiazolinone (0.2%), produced by Chemotechnique Diagnostics, Sweden, were performed. In a group of 29 individuals with contact allergy to isothiazolinones, prick tests with methylisothiazolinone (0.001%, 0.01%, 0.1%, 1%) (Sigma-Aldrich, Germany) were conducted. RESULTS: Of the 1137 subjects, 95 (8.3%) were allergic to isothiazolinones, slightly more often females - 71 (8.5%) than males - 24 (7.9%). In total, 150 positive patch tests with isothiazolinones (13.2%) were obtained. The number of positive results with methylisothiazolinone alone (7.8%) was higher than the number with methylisothiazolinone from Kathon CG (5.4%). Among the subjects sensitized to methylisothiazolinone alone strongly positive patch tests (+++) concerned 60.7%. In the female group, office workers (42.3%) and medical staff (18.3%) predominated, and in the male group - locksmiths, turners, mechanics and similar ones (45.8%), and construction workers (25.0%). Prick tests with methylisothiazolinone were negative, and they became positive after 3-5 h. CONCLUSIONS: Isothiazolinones, particularly methylisothiazolinone, are significant causal factors of contact allergy, including that of occupational origin. They have strongly allergenic properties, and in patch tests they often give very severe inflammatory reactions. The issue of the role of immediate allergy in the pathogenesis of isothiazolinones sensitization requires further research. Med Pr. 2020;71(5):603-11.

Occupational Contact Dermatitis: Evaluation and Management Considerations.

This article provides an overview of the evaluation and management of occupational contact dermatitis, including how to evaluate a patient with suspected occupational contact dermatitis. Patch testing, how to perform a site visit, and how to properly manage using preventative measures, prescribed therapies, and patient education are discussed.

Economic evaluation of a tertiary prevention program for occupational skin diseases in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Occupational skin diseases (OSDs) are the most common work-related diseases in Germany and responsible for a large individual and financial burden. Therefore, a tertiary individual prevention program (TIP) is offered to patients with severe OSD who are at increased risk of abandoning their profession. OBJECTIVES: To define cost of illness (COI) of OSD in Germany and to economically evaluate the TIP from a societal perspective. METHODS: In this study, data on patients taking part in the TIP (September 2005 to December 2009) were collected. Sociodemographic and medical data, costs, disease severity (Osnabrueck Hand Eczema Severity Index), and quality of life (QoL; Dermatology Life Quality Index) were assessed. COI and cost-effectiveness analyses were performed with a simulated control group. RESULTS: In the analysis, 1041 patients were included. Intervention costs per person were €15 009 with decreasing COI over time. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio revealed expenses per patient of €8942 for a reduction in severity level and €9093 for an improvement in QoL in the base case. Considering costs for retraining, the break-even point is reached if the TIP prevents retraining in approximately 64% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: The decreased COI in this long-term evaluation indicates that the TIP is cost-effective in patients with severe OSD.

Systemic therapy and the use of complementary and alternative medicine in patients with recognized occupational hand eczema in Denmark: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised that a chronic course of hand eczema (HE) could be fostered by a lack of efficient treatment at an early stage. OBJECTIVES: First, to assess the prevalence of systemic treatment in patients with chronic occupational HE (OHE) and relate this to demographic data, HE severity, and atopic dermatitis (AD). Second, to explore the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in the same population. METHODS: Baseline data were obtained from a registry-based study including patients with recognized OHE in a 2-year period in Denmark, comprising a total of 2703 workers. A follow-up questionnaire after 4 to 5 years included questions on disease severity and treatments. RESULTS: A total of 1565 participants responded to the questionnaire, and of these 1203 had ongoing HE at follow-up and were included in the study. In total, 10.0% had received systemic therapy, whereas this share was 13.3% in those with self-reported moderate-to-severe HE. Age >35 years, previous or current AD, and severe eczema were factors related to use of systemic treatment. Use of CAM was reported by 6.2% of the study population. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that chronicity of HE may be perpetuated by the lack of efficient treatment.

Occupational Dermatosis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to provide an update on occupational contact dermatitis including gaps in knowledge and practice. Occupational contact dermatitis is the most common occupational skin disease. RECENT FINDINGS: New sources of exposure for known allergens and new allergens are continually being reported. Through clinical databases and surveillance systems, effects of prevention efforts or introduction of new allergens or new uses of known allergens can be monitored. Though the diagnostic process is clear, there are delays in workers seeking care. As early detection and intervention improves outcomes, screening should be implemented. Gaps in primary prevention in the workplace are identified and should be addressed to reduce the burden of disease. Surveillance systems support the prevention mandate. Understanding limitations of our knowledge and identifying gaps in practice can lead to initiatives to address research and practice needs and improve prevention of occupational dermatoses.

Factors influencing prognosis for occupational hand eczema: new trends.

BACKGROUND: Variables traditionally reported to influence the prognosis of occupational hand eczema (OHE) are atopic dermatitis (AD) and contact sensitization. However, recent studies indicate that lifestyle factors may be of major importance. OBJECTIVES: To identify factors influencing the prognosis in a cohort of patients with recognized OHE. METHODS: In this register-based cohort study, individuals with hand eczema recognized as occupational disease in the period January 2010-December 2011 were identified using files from Labor Market Insurance Denmark and included in the study. At baseline, information on sex, age, occupation, wet work, AD and contact sensitization was collected. In 2015 participants received a questionnaire with questions about lifestyle factors, current occupation and healing of OHE. RESULTS: In total, 2703 patients received the questionnaire; 1491 responded to the question about healing of OHE and were included in the study. Altogether, 19·3% of patients reported complete healing at follow-up. Current tobacco smoking and a high level of stress were factors inversely associated with healing of hand eczema (P < 0·001 and P = 0·030, respectively), while a high level of exercise was significantly related to healing of eczema (P = 0·011). Change of profession was a favourable prognostic factor, while age, sex, AD, contact sensitization and education did not significantly influence prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Traditionally important risk factors such as AD and contact sensitization had no marked influence on prognosis, while lifestyle factors were of major importance. Our findings indicate that risk factors may vary over time, allowing for new perspectives on prevention. What's already known about this topic? Occupational hand eczema has a relapsing course and a poor overall prognosis. Atopic dermatitis and contact sensitization have previously been reported as risk factors for a poor prognosis. What does this study add? The results indicate that lifestyle factors are of importance for the prognosis of occupational hand eczema. Traditionally reported risk factors such as atopic dermatitis and contact sensitization do not currently influence prognosis.

Occupational and Hand Dermatitis: a Practical Approach.

Occupational skin disease is common. It affects workers more often than reported. Contact dermatitis, both irritant and allergic, accounts for the majority of occupational skin diagnoses. Occupational contact dermatitis (OCD) frequently affects the hands and may have a profound impact on an employee's ability to perform a job. Severe OCD can affect a worker's activities of daily living and can even lead to job loss. Numerous irritants have been described in the workplace, from the common (wet work) to the more obscure (warm, dry air). Several contact allergens may be work-related, and the majority of established occupational allergens are also known nonoccupational allergens. Emerging occupational allergens are continually described in the literature. Patch testing is the gold standard for the workup of allergic contact dermatitis. Patch testing in the setting of OCD may require extended or unique allergen trays, as well as a thorough occupational history and collection of workplace Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS). These MSDS contain valuable information but may not be complete or accurate. Proof of occupational causation can be aided by employing the Mathias criteria. Certain industries and occupations are associated with higher rates of OCD, and as expected, the industries with direct contact with irritants and allergens are highly represented. The differential diagnosis for occupational dermatitis is broad and should be considered when evaluating an employee with suspected OCD. Some other diagnoses to consider include atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, and manifestations of internal disease, as well as an overlap syndrome of more than one diagnosis. OCD treatment should ideally follow the public health hazard controls' stepwise approach. Prevention and early intervention are key to promoting occupational health and preventing OCD. Multidisciplinary teams have been successful in the treatment of OCD, and newly described topical treatments may provide additional modalities for use in the occupational setting.