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.

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.

Adverse skin reactions among health care workers using face personal protective equipment during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey of six hospitals in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) report frequent adverse skin reactions (ASRs) due to face personal protective equipment (F-PPE) use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To describe self-reported ASRs among HCWs using F-PPE; investigate background factors, such as chronic skin diseases and skin types (dry, oily, combination, sensitive), and determine whether HCWs took preventive methods against ASRs. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to 22 993 HCWs at hospitals. RESULTS: The prevalence of ASRs was 61.9% based on 10 287 responders. Different types of F-PPE caused different reactions. The most common ASRs from surgical masks were spots and pimples (37.2%) and from FFP3 masks was red and irritated skin (27.3%). A significantly higher proportion of HCWs with chronic skin diseases had ASRs (71.6%) than those without chronic skin diseases (59.7%) (P < .001). Some skin types were more prone to ASRs (sensitive skin [78.8%] vs dry skin [54.3%]; P = .001). HCWs using F-PPE for >6 hours versus <3 hours per day had a four times higher ASR risk (P = <.001). Nearly all HCWs used preventive and/or counteractive methods (94.2%). CONCLUSIONS: It is important to consider background factors, such as chronic skin diseases and skin types, to prevent and counteract ASRs due to F-PPE use.

Allergic contact cheilitis caused by propolis: case report.

Propolis is a lipophilic resin extracted from plants by bees. The purpose of this case report was to show the importance of this substance as cause of allergic contact cheilitis. A 21-year-old female patient complained of pruritic perioral eczema for 5 years. In the past months it also affected the neck. After diagnosing contact dermatitis, she was submitted to a patch test with a Latin American baseline series. The result was strongly positive for propolis (++) and weakly positive for perfume mix I (+). After the test, the patient revealed she had been using propolis drops, per oris, for 10 years. The worsening of the condition was due to increased dose, aiming "to improve immunity", during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The contact allergy to propolis might be increasing due to the widespread use of natural products. Propolis is a sensitizer to be considered in patients with long-lasting cheilitis.

Tinea incognito "mask"erading as allergic contact dermatitis due to COVID-19 facial covering in children.

We present three children with tinea incognito initially misdiagnosed as allergic contact dermatitis to face masks. All three patients presented with pruritic erythematous patches and plaques across the malar cheek and nose. This case series suggests that clinicians should keep a broad differential when evaluating mask-related facial dermatoses in children.