Contact allergy investigations in healthcare workers with face mask-related skin disease.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of face masks has increased among healthcare workers (HCWs). Questionnaire studies have shown a high frequency of self-reported facial adverse skin reactions. Case reports have been published on face mask-induced allergic contact dermatitis and urticaria. OBJECTIVES: To describe the results of the contact allergy investigations in consecutive HCWs investigated for skin reactions to face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic and the results of the chemical investigations of face masks supplied by the hospital. METHODS: Participants were patch tested with baseline series and chemicals previously reported in face masks not included in the baseline series. Face mask(s) brought by the HCW were tested as is and/or in acetone extract. Chemical analyses were performed on nine different face masks for potential allergens. RESULTS: Fifty-eight HCWs were investigated. No contact allergies were found to the face mask(s) tested. Eczema was the most common type of skin reaction, followed by an acneiform reaction. Colophonium-related substances were found in one respirator and 2,6-di-t-butyl-4-methylphenol (BHT) were found in two respirators. CONCLUSION: Based on this report, contact allergies to face masks is uncommon. Patch test with colophonium-related substances and BHT should be considered when investigating adverse skin reactions to face masks.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis and Patch Testing in Skin of Color Patients.

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.

Occupational Skin Dermatitis among Healthcare Workers Associated with the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Review of the Literature.

The skin is the outermost layer of the human body and is continually exposed to numerous external stimuli, which can cause unwanted skin irritation. Occupational skin diseases are the most prevalent form of work-related illness and are found in a variety of sectors, particularly healthcare. During the recent COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare professionals experienced a variety of unexpected, unusual occupational skin diseases associated with COVID-19-engaged employment. Because the clinical characteristics of these types of skin inflammation are unique, this review focuses on the characteristics of a large category of occupational workers, namely COVID-19-engaged healthcare professionals. Furthermore, we examined the potential pathogeneses of occupational skin disorders associated with COVID-19-engaged labor, as well as different preventative methods.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Sexual and Gender Minority Patients: Disparities and a Call to Action.

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.

Incidence of skin diseases in healthcare workers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic at Trieste hospitals (northeastern Italy).

BACKGROUND: Occupational skin diseases (OSDs) are common in healthcare workers (HCWs). OBJECTIVES: To investigate and compare the incidence and clinical features of OSDs among HCWs before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Incident cases of OSDs were investigated in the cohort of HCWs at Trieste Hospitals from 1 July 2018 (3340 workers) to 31 October 2021 (137 532 person-months). RESULTS: The monthly incidence was ranging from 0 to 11.90 cases per 10 000 person-months in pre-COVID-19 period (cumulative incidence 4.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.9-6.0) and from 0 to 13.61 cases per 10 000 person-months in COVID-19 period (cumulative incidence 5.06; 95% CI: 3.6-6.9). The incidence rate ratio (IRR) between COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 period was 1.22 (95% CI: 0.73-1.98). The incidence of OSDs in the COVID-19 period was 6.1 (4.2-8.6) and 2.7 (95% CI: 1.1-5.6) cases × 10 000 person-months for women and men, respectively, with an IRR of 2.25 (95% CI: 0.98-5.9). Incidence in nurses in the COVID-19 period was 6.7 (95% CI: 4.2-10.2) cases × 10 000 person-months. CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of OSDs was a little bit higher during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the previous period but fluctuation of numbers were mainly related to calendar period, with higher incidence in winter and spring. Incidence data were higher than that observed in 2004-2013 in the same cohort. Face dermatitis cases doubled after the start of COVID-19 pandemic. Overall data demonstrated a non-significant increase of OSDs in HCWs during the pandemic, probably due to the preventive strategies set up in our cohort over the years.

Prevention of occupational hand eczema in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A controlled intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Occupational hand eczema (HE) is common among healthcare workers (HCWs) and has-in some regions of the world-increased during the COVID-19 pandemic due to related hygiene measures. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of an intervention for HE prevention in HCWs during the pandemic. METHODS: A prospective, controlled, unblinded interventional trial was conducted in 302 HCWs. The intervention group (IG) (n = 135) received online-based health education and free access to hand cleansing and hand care products. The control group (CG) (n = 167) did not receive any intervention within the study. At baseline (T0), after 3 (T1) and 6 (T2) months, participants completed standardized questionnaires. The Osnabrueck Hand Eczema Severity Index (OHSI) was assessed at T0 and T2. RESULTS: During the observation period, there were no new HE cases in the IG (n = 115) and 12 cases (8.8%) in the CG (n = 136). OHSI values at T2 were lower in the IG (b = -1.44, p < 0.001). Daily use of emollients was higher at work (b = 1.73, p < 0.001) and at home (b = 1.62, p < 0.001) in the IG at T2. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention was effective in HE prevention and improving skin care behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Facial dermatoses induced by face masks: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

The use of masks for infection control was common in the COVID-19 pandemic. As numerous cross-sectional studies have suggested a link between the use of such masks and various facial dermatoses, a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies was conducted to evaluate this association, as well as potential risk factors for the development of such facial dermatoses. Observational studies were searched for in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register. Thirty-seven observational studies with a total of 29 557 study participants were identified. This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist and quality was assessed via the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale., Overall prevalence of facial dermatoses was 55%. Individually, acne, facial dermatitis, itch and pressure injuries were consistently reported as facial dermatoses, with a pooled prevalence of 31%, 24%, 30% and 31%, respectively. Duration of mask-wear was the most significant risk factor for the development of facial dermatoses (95% CI: 1.31-1.54, p < 0.001). Overall, facial dermatoses associated with mask wear are common, and consist of distinct entities. They are related to duration of use. Appropriate and tailored treatment is important to improve the outcomes for these affected patients.

Hand hygiene and hand eczema: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hand eczema is a common inflammatory condition of the skin that has been linked to hand hygiene. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the risks of hand eczema associated with hand hygiene, including frequency of hand washing, wet work and use of alcohol hand rub. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library was performed for cohort, case-control or cross-sectional studies that analysed the association between hand hygiene and risk of hand eczema. Results of individual studies were presented in respective forest plots and pooled summary relative risks were estimated using a random-effects model. Forty-five studies were included in the analysis. Hand washing at least 8-10 times daily significantly increased risk of hand eczema (relative risk [RR] 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.35-1.68; p < 0.001). The risk was related to hand washing frequency, with higher pooled RR of 1.66 (95% CI: 1.51-1.83; p < 0.001) with increased hand washing at least 15-20 times daily. However, use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer was not significantly associated with risk of hand eczema. Given the widespread implementation of hand hygiene practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a pertinent need to understand skin care habits specific to the hands to avoid a greater incidence of hand eczema.

Effects of skin washing frequency on the epidermal barrier function and inflammatory processes of the epidermis: An experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Increased hand hygiene measures during the COVID-19 pandemic have led to an increased quantum of hand eczema (HE). OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of varying washing frequencies using current mild cleansing agents-alongside with the effect of a rehydrating cream-on the epidermal barrier function and inflammatory processes of the stratum corneum(SC). METHODS: Standardized skin washings on the volar aspects of the lower arms of skin-healthy volunteers were performed using the automated cleansing device either 5 or 11 times within 4 h for 60 s each with a standard cleanser, a lipid-containing syndet, or a lipid-containing syndet followed by one-time application of a rehydrating cream. Skin bioengineering parameters (transepidermal water loss, SC hydration, erythema, and SC pH) and biochemical/immunological parameters (interleukin-1α, interleukin-1α receptor antagonist and natural moisturizing factor) of SCsamples collected by tape stripping were assessed. RESULTS: All applied washing procedures provided comparable, mild effects on the epidermal barrier function and skin inflammation. CONCLUSION: Occupational skin cleansers seem to have improved regarding skin barrier damaging effects. To further corroborate this, a study design, modified on the basis of our findings, applying longer washing periods for consecutive days seems desirable.

Skin barrier function in nursing apprentices during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Studies investigating simultaneous influence of personal and work-related factors on skin health during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are missing. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the associations of skin hazards relevant for nursing apprentices with parameters of skin barrier function. METHODS: A total of 238 nursing apprentices attending the final year of education (median age 19 years) from vocational schools in Zagreb, Croatia, were enrolled in this study. We administered a questionnaire based on the Nordic Occupational Skin Questionnaire to the nursing apprentices, performed clinical examination of skin on the hands, and evaluated transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and stratum corneum (SC) pH on the dorsum of the hand. RESULTS: Around half of nursing apprentices had compromised hand skin barrier function, as indicated by TEWL values >25 g/m2 /h (48%) and SC pH >5.5 (57%). Skin barrier was compromised in around 40% of nursing apprentices without clinically observed skin symptoms. Elevated SC pH was independent of ambient conditions associated with skin symptoms and female sex. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of SC pH was shown to be less sensitive to field conditions than TEWL, and should be employed more in the field studies. Strengthening of skin health promotion in healthcare workers and apprentices is needed in pandemic conditions.