Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Dermatitis ; 34(2): 85-89, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2253331

ABSTRACT

Objective: Skin of color patients face important health issues relevant to dermatologists, such as allergic contact dermatitis; however, there is a lack of information surrounding common allergens causing contact dermatitis that disproportionately affect skin of color patients, as well as interpreting patch testing in this population. Methods: Covidence, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant articles studying allergic and irritant contact dermatitis in skin of color patients. Results: The most common positive reactions in African American patients included PPD, balsam of Peru, bacitracin, fragrance mix, and nickel. The most common positive reactions in Hispanic patients included Carba mix, nickel sulfate, and thiuram mix. The most common positive reactions in Asian patients included nickel sulfate, fragrance mix, and potassium dichromate. When interpreting patch test results in patients with higher Fitzpatrick skin types, positive patch tests presented with lichenification and hyperpigmentation, rather than erythema and vesicles. Furthermore, characteristic bright red or pink hues for positive results may appear violaceous or faint pink. Conclusions: Awareness of the common allergens associated with allergic contact dermatitis in patients of skin of color can help guide patch testing as an important diagnostic tool. Further research must be conducted regarding contact dermatitis in this patient population, especially given the relative lack of data surrounding Hispanic, Asian and Pacific Islander, and Native American patients.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Skin Pigmentation , Humans , Patch Tests/methods , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Allergens/adverse effects , Excipients
2.
Dermatitis ; 34(1): 29-32, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2222535

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) patients face health issues relevant to dermatologists, such as allergic contact dermatitis (ACD); however, there is a lack of information surrounding common allergens causing ACD that disproportionally affect SGM patients. Methods: Covidence, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant articles studying ACD in the SGM population. Results: Common allergens associated with ACD in SGM patients include nitrates, fragrance mix, methylisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone-methylchloroisothiazolinone, topical antibiotics, and allergens seen in chest binders. Common anatomic sites included the chest, cheeks, perioral region, nasal orifices, and the anogenital region. Conclusions: Certain allergens and body sites affected by ACD are more common among the SGM community. This can help guide patch testing as a diagnostic tool. Further research must be conducted regarding ACD in SGM patients.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Humans , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Allergens/adverse effects , Patch Tests/adverse effects , Anti-Bacterial Agents , Retrospective Studies
3.
J Appl Toxicol ; 42(6): 930-941, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1473856

ABSTRACT

Water-only or water and soap are widely recommended as preferred solutions for dermal decontamination. However, limited efficacy data exist. We summarized experimental studies evaluating in vitro efficacy of water-only or soap and water in decontaminating chemical warfare agents (CWA) or their simulants from human skin models. Embase, Covidence®, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for articles using water-only or soap and water decontamination methods for removal of CWA/CWA simulants in in vitro human skin models. Data extraction was completed from seven studies, yielding seven contaminants. Water-only decontamination led to partial decontamination in all skin samples (100%, n = 81/81). Soap and water decontamination led to partial decontamination in all skin samples (100%, n = 143/143). Four studies found decontamination to either paradoxically enhance absorption of contaminants or their penetration rates, known as the "wash-in" effect. Despite recommendations, water-only or water and soap decontamination were found to yield partial decontamination of CWA or their simulants in all human in vitro studies. Thus, more effective decontaminating agents are needed. Some studies demonstrated increased or faster penetration of chemicals following decontamination, which could prove deadly for agents such as VX, although these findings require in vivo validation. Heterogeneity in experimental setups limits interstudy comparison, and it remains unclear when water-only or water and soap are ideal decontaminants, which requires more studies. Pending manuscripts will summarize in vivo human and animal efficacy data. International harmonized efficacy protocol should enable more efficient public health decisions for evidence-based public health decisions.


Subject(s)
Chemical Warfare Agents , Animals , Chemical Warfare Agents/toxicity , Decontamination/methods , Humans , Skin , Skin Absorption , Soaps , Water/metabolism
4.
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev ; 24(7): 325-336, 2021 10 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455046

ABSTRACT

Water-only or soap and water solutions are considered a gold standard for skin decontamination. However, there is lack of conclusive data regarding their efficacy. The aim of this study was to summarize in vivo animal model data on skin decontamination using water-only, and/or soap and water. Covidence, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant articles using water-only or soap and water decontamination methods in in vivo animals. Data extraction was completed from studies, representing three animal models, and 11 contaminants. Results demonstrated water-only decontamination solutions led to complete decontamination in 3.1% (n = 16/524) protocols, incomplete decontamination in 90.6% (n = 475/524) of protocols, and mortality in 6.3% (n = 33/524) of protocols. Soap and water decontamination solutions resulted in complete decontamination in 6.9% (n = 8/116) protocols, incomplete decontamination in 92.2% (n = 107/116) of protocols, and mortality in 6.9% (n = 8/116) of protocols. Although water only, or soap and water is considered a gold standard for skin decontamination, most papers investigated found that water only, and soap and water provided incomplete decontamination. Due to the insufficient data, and limitations that hinder the applicability of available data, evidence indicates that more contemporary studies investigating skin decontamination are needed, and compared to other model species, including humans, when practical.


Subject(s)
Decontamination/methods , Skin/metabolism , Soaps/chemistry , Animals , Humans , Models, Animal , Skin/chemistry , Species Specificity , Water/chemistry
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL