Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Dermatitis ; 28(3): 183-194, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28394773

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the epidemiology of contact dermatitis in production workers (PWs). OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of contact dermatitis and characterize clinically relevant and occupationally related allergens among North American PWs undergoing patch testing. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data from 1998 to 2014. RESULTS: Of 39,332 patch-tested patients, 2732 (7.0%) were PWs. Among PWs, most were men (62.4%) and white (83.9%). A history of childhood eczema was uncommon (11.3%). Prevalent occupations included machine operators (27.3%); fabricators, assemblers, and hand-working occupations (16.8%); and precision metalworking occupations (16.1%). The most frequent sites of dermatitis were the hands (53.8%) and arms (29.4%), which were significantly more commonly affected compared with non-PWs (P < 0.0001). Occupationally related skin disease, allergic contact dermatitis, and irritant contact dermatitis were also significantly more common in PWs (49.9% vs 10.6%, 58.9% vs 53.7%, and 32.7% vs 25.7%, respectively; all Ps < 0.0001). Epoxy (15.3%), thiuram mix (8.3%), carba mix (8.1%), formaldehyde (6.3%), and cobalt (5.9%) were the most frequent occupationally related allergens. The top allergen sources included adhesives/glues (16.0%), metalworking fluids/cutting oils (6.8%), and coatings (6.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Production workers had a high rate of occupationally related skin disease, as well as irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. Involvement of exposed body areas was common. Frequently identified allergens included adhesives/glues, rubber accelerators, metals, and preservatives.


Subject(s)
Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Occupational/epidemiology , Manufacturing Industry , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Patch Tests , Adult , Canada/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Irritant/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Irritant/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Irritant/etiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , North America/epidemiology , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Prevalence , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology , Workforce
2.
Dermatitis ; 28(3): 195-203, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28338540

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the epidemiology of contact dermatitis (CD) in print machine operators (PMOs). OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of CD and characterize clinically relevant and occupationally related allergens among PMOs undergoing patch testing. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group data from 1998 to 2014. RESULTS: Of 39,332 patch-tested patients, 132 (0.3%) were PMOs. Among PMOs, most were male (75.0%) and white (92.4%). The majority were printing press operators (85.6%). The most frequent sites of dermatitis were hands (63.6%), arms (29.5%), and face/scalp (24.2%). More than half had an occupationally related skin condition (56.1%). Final diagnoses were most commonly allergic CD (58.3%) and irritant CD (33.3%). Cobalt (20.8%), carba mix (12.5%), thiuram mix (8.3%), and formaldehyde (8.3%) were the most frequent occupationally related allergens. The top allergen sources included inks (22.9%), gloves (20.8%), and coatings/dye/copy/photographic chemicals (14.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Allergic CD, irritant CD, and involvement of exposed body areas were common among PMOs. Common allergens included rubber accelerators, metals, and preservatives.


Subject(s)
Allergens/adverse effects , Book Industry , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Occupational/epidemiology , Patch Tests , Adult , Canada/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Irritant/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Irritant/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Ink , Male , North America/epidemiology , Prevalence , Printing , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology , Workforce
3.
Dermatitis ; 28(2): 152-161, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28169849

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Teledermatology (TD) is the use of imaging technology to provide dermatology services at a distance. To date, studies assessing its application for grading skin patch test reactions have been lacking. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to compare conventional, in-person (IP) grading of skin patch test reactions with store-forward TD. METHODS: Patients undergoing patch testing to the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) screening series were invited to participate in this repeated-measures study. Photographs of the NACDG screening series patch sites were obtained at 2 time points (48-hour and final readings). Teledermatology assessments were completed by the same staff dermatologist who performed the IP readings; 48-hour and final TD photographs were viewed at weeks 4 and 8 after the IP encounter, respectively, to prevent recall bias. Staff dermatologists were blinded to IP grading results. The main outcome was percent agreement. Eight categories of agreement were created according to possible pairings of TD and IP reading results. Three final outcome groups of "success," "indeterminate," and "failure" were defined based on clinical significance. RESULTS: One hundred one participants completed the study. There were 7070 comparison points between IP and TD final readings. Excluding negative/negative agreement, there was "success" of TD in 54% of final readings. "Indeterminate" agreement with possible clinical significance was present in 40% of final readings. There was "failure" (definite clinical significance) in 6% of final readings. CONCLUSIONS: Teledermatology may be a viable option for grading skin patch test reactions, particularly for clinicians who perform limited patch testing. However, a clinically significant "failure" rate of 6% and practical barriers to TD implementation may preclude its widespread use for skin patch testing in tertiary referral centers where large numbers of patches are tested per patient.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatology , Patch Tests/methods , Telemedicine/methods , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
4.
J Am Acad Dermatol ; 76(4): 695-702, 2017 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27955934

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Facial port-wine stains (PWS) are considered by some an aesthetic skin problem, yet impact on quality of life (QoL) has not been objectively documented. OBJECTIVE: We sought to (1) characterize the effect of PWS on QoL in adults, (2) to identify the clinical and demographic factors that affect QoL, and (3) to compare our results with QoL studies in other skin conditions. METHODS: In total, 244 adults with facial PWS completed an online QoL survey, which included the Skindex-29 instrument. RESULTS: QoL in adults with facial PWS was diminished, especially from an emotional perspective. Variables associated with reduced QoL in all Skindex-29 subdomains included comorbid depression, limited facial mobility, and presence of other skin conditions. Persons with hypertrophy had more emotional and symptomatic impairment. The composite dermatologic-specific QoL scores were similar to those of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, rosacea, alopecia, and vitiligo. LIMITATIONS: Selection bias was a potential limitation, as participants were primarily recruited from patient support groups. CONCLUSION: Our analysis demonstrates that the presence of a facial PWS has a significant negative impact on QoL. Dermatologists caring for patients with PWS should inquire about QoL, provide appropriate support and resources, and consider QoL when discussing treatment options and obtaining authorization for these procedures.


Subject(s)
Facial Dermatoses/psychology , Port-Wine Stain/psychology , Quality of Life , Adult , Autistic Disorder/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Emotions , Esthetics , Facial Dermatoses/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Hypertrophy , Interpersonal Relations , Learning Disabilities/epidemiology , Male , Nervous System Diseases/epidemiology , Port-Wine Stain/epidemiology , Selection Bias , Skin Diseases/psychology , Social Stigma , Surveys and Questionnaires , Terminology as Topic
5.
Dermatitis ; 28(1): 47-57, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27775971

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Contact dermatoses are common in mechanic and repair occupations. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to (1) estimate the prevalence of occupationally related contact dermatitis among mechanics/repairers patch tested from 1998 to 2014 by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, (2) characterize responsible allergens and irritants, and their sources, and (3) compare results among 3 occupational subgroups (mechanics, electrical/electronic, and other). METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group between 1998 and 2014. RESULTS: Of 38,784 patients patch tested, 691 (1.8%) were mechanics/repairers. Male sex (93.5%) and hand involvement (59.5%) were common overall. Occupationally related skin disease was more prevalent among vehicle and mobile equipment mechanics/repairers (52.7%) and other mechanics/repairers (41.4%) than electrical/electronic equipment mechanics/repairers (21.3%). Overall, carba mix, thiuram mix, and methylchloroisothiazolone/methylisothiazolone were the most common occupation-related clinically relevant allergens. Gloves, automotive vehicles, solvents, oils, lubricants, and fuels were the most common sources of responsible allergens. CONCLUSIONS: Common occupationally related allergens included rubber accelerators and the preservative methylchloroisothiazolone/methylisothiazolone.


Subject(s)
Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/epidemiology , Manufacturing Industry , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Adult , Canada , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Irritant/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Occupational/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , North America , Patch Tests/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , United States
7.
Dermatitis ; 27(6): 382-384, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27775964
8.
Dermatitis ; 27(6): 348-354, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27775977

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Surfactants are cleansing agents used in products such as shampoos and soaps. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to identify positivity rates to 3 novel amide-containing surfactants (sodium lauroyl sarcosinate, isostearamidopropyl morpholine lactate, and disodium lauroamphodiacetate) and evaluate co-reactivity with other surfactants in patients with known surfactant sensitivity. METHODS: Previously patch-tested, surfactant-positive patients were identified via chart review and invited to participate. Participants were patch tested to screening surfactants (cocamidopropyl betaine, amidoamine, dimethylaminopropylamine, cocamide diethanolamine [DEA], oleamidopropyl dimethylamine, and decyl glucoside), as well as 3 novel surfactants: sodium lauroyl sarcosinate 0.5% and 1.0% aq, isostearamidopropyl morpholine lactate 0.5% and 1.0% aq, disodium lauroamphodiacetate 1.0 and 2.0% aq, and a hypoallergenic liquid cleanser (tested semiopen). Participants and clinicians were blinded. The order of tested allergens was randomized. RESULTS: Forty-seven participants completed the study. Excluding doubtful reactions, positive reactions were most common to oleamidopropyl dimethylamine (34%) and dimethylaminopropylamine (34%), followed by isostearamidopropyl morpholine lactate (23%). Reactivity was not associated with history of childhood eczema. Co-reactivity was high among oleamidopropyl dimethylamine, dimethylaminopropylamine, cocamidopropyl betaine, amidoamine, and isostearamidopropyl morpholine lactate. None of the participants who reacted to cocamide DEA reacted to an additional surfactant. CONCLUSIONS: Isostearamidopropyl morpholine lactate may be an important emerging allergen with sensitivity rates comparable with those of oleamidopropyl dimethylamine and dimethylaminopropylamine. Co-reactivity among surfactants was frequent except for cocamide DEA.


Subject(s)
Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Surface-Active Agents/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patch Tests , Sarcosine/adverse effects , Sarcosine/analogs & derivatives , Young Adult
9.
Semin Cutan Med Surg ; 35(3): 161-9, 2016 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27607325

ABSTRACT

This review provides a clinically-oriented summary of the most commonly encountered overgrowth syndromes associated with vascular malformations. This manuscript will outline morphologic features, clinical evaluation and management of this complex group of patients. Recent genetic advances have aided in classification and help to explain overlapping clinical features in many cases.


Subject(s)
Abnormalities, Multiple/diagnosis , Abnormalities, Multiple/therapy , Vascular Diseases/diagnosis , Vascular Diseases/therapy , Vascular Malformations/diagnosis , Vascular Malformations/therapy , Beckwith-Wiedemann Syndrome/diagnosis , Beckwith-Wiedemann Syndrome/therapy , Class I Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases , Humans , Mutation , Neoplasms, Vascular Tissue/diagnosis , Neoplasms, Vascular Tissue/therapy , Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases/genetics , Proteus Syndrome/diagnosis , Proteus Syndrome/therapy , Skin Neoplasms/diagnosis , Skin Neoplasms/therapy , Syndrome
10.
Dermatitis ; 27(4): 227-8, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27323233
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...