Contact dermatoses in healthcare workers: reduction in type I latex allergy in a UK centre

Clayton, Timothy; Wilkinson, S. M.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2230.2005.01768.x

Cited by 26 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A study in Germany reported a high prevalence of 8% among 226 dental students who had only been exposed to exclusive powder-free latex gloves 30. Similarly in the UK despite a total ban on powdered latex gloves Clayton and Wilkinson31 found a 10% prevalence of latex sensitisation in HCWs. It is also not clear to what extent the aeroallergens released by colleagues using powdered latex gloves influence this finding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The prevalence of latex sensitisation and allergy and associated risk factors among healthcare workers using hypoallergenic latex gloves at King Edward VIII Hospital, KwaZulu-Natal South Africa: a cross-sectional study

Phaswana

Naidoo

2013

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To cite: Phaswana SM, Naidoo S. The prevalence of latex sensitisation and allergy and associated risk factors among healthcare workers using hypoallergenic latex gloves at King Edward VIII Hospital, KwaZulu-Natal South Africa: a crosssectional study. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: A tertiary hospital in eThekwini municipality, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.Participants: 600 healthcare workers were randomly selected and 501 (337 exposed and 164 unexposed) participated. Participants who were pregnant, with less than 1 year of work as a healthcare worker and a history of anaphylactic reaction were excluded from the study. Primary and secondary outcome measures:Latex sensitisation and latex allergy were the outcome of interest and they were successfully measured.Results: The prevalence of latex sensitisation and allergy was observed among exposed workers (7.1% and 5.9%) and unexposed workers (3.1% and 1.8%). Work-related allergy symptoms were significantly higher in exposed workers (40.9%, p<0.05). Duration of employment was inversely associated with latex allergy (OR 0.9; 95% CI 0.8 to 0.9). The risk of latex sensitisation (OR 4.2; 95% CI 1.2 to 14.1) and allergy (OR 5.1; 95% CI 1.2 to 21.2) increased with the exclusive use of powder-free latex gloves. A doseresponse relationship was observed for powdered latex gloves (OR 1.1; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.2). Atopy (OR 1.5; 95% CI 0.7 to 3.3 and OR 1.4; 95% CI 0.6 to 3.2) and fruit allergy (OR 2.3; 95% CI 0.8 to 6.7 and OR 3.1; 95% CI 1.1 to 9.2) also increased the risk of latex sensitisation and allergy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has proven to reduce latex-induced clinical outcomes. Even with this intervention, studies in Western countries such as Germany and the UK have shown that the risk of latex sensitisation still exists and more needs to be carried out to protect HCWs 30 31…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prevalence of latex sensitisation and allergy and associated risk factors among healthcare workers using hypoallergenic latex gloves at King Edward VIII Hospital, KwaZulu-Natal South Africa: a cross-sectional study

Phaswana

Naidoo

2013

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Type IV reactions are generally considered more common than type I reactions and a high prevalence rate of type IV allergy among healthcare workers has been highlighted in several surveys [3,23,85,86]. Skin patch testing using NRL glove extracts can demonstrate a response to both specific protein allergens and the chemicals present and so will be a combination of both type I and IV reactions.…”

Section: Prevalence Of Type IV Allergymentioning

confidence: 99%

Latex Medical Gloves: Time for a Reappraisal

Palosuo

Antoniadou

Gottrup

et al. 2011

Int Arch Allergy Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many hospitals have implemented policies to restrict or ban the use of devices made of natural rubber latex (NRL) in healthcare as precautionary measures against the perceived risk of NRL allergy. Changes in glove technology, progress in measuring the specific allergenic potential of gloves and a dramatic decrease in the prevalence of NRL allergies after interventions and education prompted us to revisit the basis for justifiable glove selection policies. The published Anglophone literature from 1990 to 2010 was reviewed for original articles and reviews dealing with the barrier and performance properties of NRL and synthetic gloves and the role of glove powder. The review shows that NRL medical gloves, when compared with synthetic gloves, tend to be stronger, more flexible and better accepted by clinicians. The introduction of powder-free gloves has been associated with reductions in protein content and associated allergies. Recently, new methods to quantify clinically relevant NRL allergens have enabled the identification of gloves with low allergenic potential. The use of low-protein, low-allergenic, powder-free gloves is associated with a significant decrease in the prevalence of type I allergic reactions to NRL among healthcare workers. Given the excellent barrier properties and operating characteristics, dramatically reduced incidences of allergic reactions, availability of specific tests for selection of low-allergen gloves, competitive costs and low environmental impact, the use of NRL gloves within the hospital environment warrants reappraisal.

show abstract

“…In Europe, thiurams in gloves are common allergens with rates of sensitization ranging from 2% to 25% (1–3). Sensitization to these compounds is a common work‐related problem, especially for the recent increase in use of latex gloves in healthcare workers and also in food workers, such as bakers, cooks, and butchers (4, 5). However, rare professional sources of thiuram allergy are reported in workers not wearing gloves: a painter (TEDT‐based bactericide in water‐based paint) (6), a farmer (boots and seed dressings) (7), a golfer (fungicide) (8) and a shepherdess (lambing ring) (9).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%