No abstract

Background Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is one of the most common occupational skin diseases (OSDs). Its prevalence and the causative allergens differ between occupations. Objectives To evaluate the prevalence of ACD and the pattern of patch test results of patients taking part in a tertiary individual prevention programme (TIP) for OSD in Germany. Patients and Methods In a retrospective cohort study, the data of 3411 TIP patients patch tested between 2007 and 2016 were analysed. Results In 2687 (78.8%) patients, work‐related skin disease was diagnosed, mostly hand dermatitis. The highest proportion of face dermatitis was seen in painters (8.1%). ACD was most common in painters (56.8%), hairdressers (45.8%), construction workers (31.5%), gardeners/florists (26.7%), and metalworkers (26.5%). On average, hairdressers had the youngest age (31.4 ± 12.6 years, P < 0.0001) and the shortest time in the profession prior to the TIP (mean 13.7 years). The pattern of patch test reactivity showed occupation‐specific differences related to work exposures. Conclusions Identification of occupational groups at risk for ACD and relevant allergens may help in the development and implementation of targeted prevention strategies. Our data suggest that there should be a particular focus on hairdressers and painters.

Background: Metalworkers are exposed to a variety of contact allergens by handling tools, metals, metalworking fluids (MWFs), oils and greases, rubber materials, and so on. Most large-scale reports on contact allergy due to MWFs are more than 10-years-old, and there are only few studies on contact allergy in mechanics and other metal workers not exposed to MWFs. Objectives: To describe a current spectrum of contact sensitization in metalworkers with occupational dermatitis (OD). Patients and Methods: Retrospective analysis of patch test data collected by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK; 2010-2018), stratifying for 804 cutting metalworkers, 2197 mechanics, and 355 other metalworkers. Results: Cutting metalworkers were most frequently sensitized to monoethanolamine (12.6%), colophonium/abietic acid (11.4%) and formaldehyde releasers (up to 8.5%) from the MWF series, and formaldehyde (4.6%) and iodopropynyl

Background: In about half of the patients reacting positive to fragrance mix I (FM I), breakdown testing remains negative. This raises the question of whether the reaction to FM I is false-positive, or the breakdown test is false-negative. Objectives: To identify characteristics and sensitization patterns of patients positive to FM I, but not to its fragrance constituents. Patients and Methods: Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) between 2005 and 2019. Three patient groups were defined according to their reaction pattern: Group I, FM I positive and ≥1 single fragrance positive in the breakdown test (n = 1912); Group II, FM I positive and breakdown test negative (n = 1318); Group III, FM I negative (n = 19 790).Results: Regarding the pattern of concomitant reactions to other fragrances, Group II had an intermediate position between Group I and Group III. In other respects (age and sex distribution, frequency of sensitization to non-fragrance baseline series allergens), Group II rather resembled Group I.Conclusions: Not every positive reaction to FM I in patients with negative breakdown tests is false-positive. There may be false-negative reactions to the single fragrance components when patch tested at 1% pet. Raising patch concentrations of some single fragrances is recommended.

No abstract