Nonallergic Reactions to Medical Tapes

Abstract

Although tape allergy is reported by 0.3% of patients, true tape allergies are rare. More commonly, patients experience NATRs. True tape allergy and NATR are mechanistically distinct and can be distinguished from each other based on history. The approach to management of each is distinct.

The effect of Tegaderm™ versus EyeGard® on eyelid erythema during general anesthesia: a randomized-controlled trial

“…Although epidermal erosion of the eyelid would be the most direct form of injury to measure, it is relatively uncommon, and as such, we chose to study eyelid erythema, which represents a more common precursor to epidural erosion. 8 As secondary outcomes, we measured patient satisfaction and the incidence of corneal abrasion. Given local anecdotal experience, our hypothesis was that there would be a difference in postoperative eyelid erythema between the two tapes.…”

Utilization of a mask fitter or micropore tape to improve the fit of a surgical mask

“…Furthermore, it might not be a good choice for male dentists with beards. A study by Smith and Zirwas [23] reported a 0.3% incidence of medical tape allergy, but most cases were not true allergy but rather non-allergic tape reactions (NATRs). Previous studies have reported substantially higher fit factor scores for sealed surgical masks in comparison to loose-fitting ones [13,24].…”

Effects of postural taping on pain, function and quality of life following osteoporotic vertebral fractures—A feasibility trial

“…A relatively large proportion of participants (23%) developed a mild skin reaction when using taping. Smith and Zirwas () reported that, although 0.347% of patients reported an allergy to medical tape, the true value was estimated to be much lower, at 0.033%. Non‐allergic tape reactions are therefore likely to be much more common than allergic ones.…”

“…Non‐allergic tape reactions are therefore likely to be much more common than allergic ones. Non‐allergic reactions may be caused by skin inflammation due to factors such as previous skin damage, skin softening, physical distortion, hair removal, tape preventing the removal of skin irritants, and repeated removal of the uppermost layer of skin (Smith & Zirwas, ). The high prevalence of such reactions in the present investigation may relate to the older population investigated, whose skin might be expected to be more fragile.…”