Interventions for preventing occupational irritant hand dermatitis

Allergic contact dermatitis: From pathophysiology to development of new preventive strategies

As the body's first line of defense, the skin is the organ most frequently exposed to chemicals present in personal hygiene products, household products, or materials used in the work environment. In this context, skin disorders account for more than 40 % of all occupational and work-related diseases, constituting a significant public health burden. Among skin disorders, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is the most prevalent occupational disease and the most common form of immunotoxicity in humans. ACD is a T-cell-mediated skin inflammation resulting from the priming and expansion of allergen-specific CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. The clinical condition is characterized by local skin rash, itchiness, redness, swelling, and lesions, being mainly diagnosed by the patch test. Upon ACD diagnosis, avoiding the exposure to the triggering allergen is the mainstay of treatment to prevent future flares. In cases where avoidance is not possible, the use of a standard of care interim treatments such as steroid creams or ointments, barrier creams, and moisturizers are strongly recommended to alleviate symptoms. In this review, we sought to provide the reader with an overview of the pathophysiology of ACD as well as the currently available pharmacological treatment options. Furthermore, a comprehensive outline of several preventive strategies is also provided.

A behaviour change package to prevent hand dermatitis in nurses working in health care: the SCIN cluster RCT

BACKGROUND

Although strategies have been developed to minimise the risk of occupational hand dermatitis in nurses, their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The Skin Care Intervention in Nurses trial tested the hypothesis that a behaviour change package intervention, coupled with provision of hand moisturisers, could reduce the point prevalence of hand dermatitis when compared with standard care among nurses working in the NHS. The secondary aim was to assess the impact of the intervention on participants' beliefs and behaviour regarding hand care, and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention in comparison with normal care.

DESIGN

Cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Thirty-five NHS hospital trusts/health boards/universities.

PARTICIPANTS

First-year student nurses with a history of atopic tendency, and full-time intensive care unit nurses.

INTERVENTION

Sites were randomly allocated to be 'intervention plus' or 'intervention light'. Participants at 'intervention plus' sites received access to a bespoke online behaviour change package intervention, coupled with personal supplies of moisturising cream (student nurses) and optimal availability of moisturising cream (intensive care unit nurses). Nurses at 'intervention light' sites received usual care, including a dermatitis prevention leaflet.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The difference between intervention plus and intervention light sites in the change of point prevalence of visible hand dermatitis was measured from images taken at baseline and at follow-up.

RANDOMISATION

Fourteen sites were randomised to the intervention plus arm, and 21 sites were randomised to the intervention light arm.

BLINDING

The participants, trial statistician, methodologist and the dermatologists interpreting the hand photographs were blinded to intervention assignment.

NUMBERS ANALYSED

An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted on data from 845 student nurses and 1111 intensive care unit nurses.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat analysis showed no evidence that the risk of developing dermatitis was greater in the intervention light group than in the intervention plus group (student nurses: odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 2.69; intensive care unit nurses: odds ratio 1.41, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 2.44). Both groups had high levels of baseline beliefs about the benefits of using hand moisturisers before, during and after work. The frequency of use of hand moisturisers before, during and after shifts was significantly higher in the intensive care unit nurses in the intervention plus arm at follow-up than in the comparator group nurses. For student nurses, the intervention plus group mean costs were £2 lower than those for the comparator and 0.00002 more quality-adjusted life-years were gained. For intensive care unit nurses, costs were £4 higher and 0.0016 fewer quality-adjusted life-years were gained.

HARMS

No adverse events were reported.

LIMITATIONS

Only 44.5% of participants in the intervention plus arm accessed the behaviour change package.

CONCLUSION

The intervention did not result in a statistically significant decrease in the prevalence of hand dermatitis in the intervention plus group.

FUTURE WORK

Participants had a high level of baseline beliefs about the importance of using hand moisturisers before, during and after work. Future research should focus on how workplace culture can be changed in order for that knowledge to be actioned.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53303171.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 58. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Interventions for preventing occupational irritant hand dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Occupational irritant hand dermatitis (OIHD) causes significant functional impairment, disruption of work, and discomfort in the working population. Different preventive measures such as protective gloves, barrier creams and moisturisers can be used, but it is not clear how effective these are. This is an update of a Cochrane review which was previously published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of primary preventive interventions and strategies (physical and behavioural) for preventing OIHD in healthy people (who have no hand dermatitis) who work in occupations where the skin is at risk of damage due to contact with water, detergents, chemicals or other irritants, or from wearing gloves.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of the following databases to January 2018: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLlNE, and Embase. We also searched five trials registers and checked the bibliographies of included studies for further references to relevant trials. We handsearched two sets of conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel and cross-over randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which examined the effectiveness of barrier creams, moisturisers, gloves, or educational interventions compared to no intervention for the primary prevention of OIHD under field conditions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were signs and symptoms of OIHD developed during the trials, and the frequency of treatment discontinuation due to adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs involving 2888 participants without occupational irritant hand dermatitis (OIHD) at baseline. Six studies, including 1533 participants, investigated the effects of barrier creams, moisturisers, or both. Three studies, including 1355 participants, assessed the effectiveness of skin protection education on the prevention of OIHD. No studies were eligible that investigated the effects of protective gloves. Among each type of intervention, there was heterogeneity concerning the criteria for assessing signs and symptoms of OIHD, the products, and the occupations. Selection bias, performance bias, and reporting bias were generally unclear across all studies. The risk of detection bias was low in five studies and high in one study. The risk of other biases was low in four studies and high in two studies.The eligible trials involved a variety of participants, including: metal workers exposed to cutting fluids, dye and print factory workers, gut cleaners in swine slaughterhouses, cleaners and kitchen workers, nurse apprentices, hospital employees handling irritants, and hairdressing apprentices. All studies were undertaken at the respective work places. Study duration ranged from four weeks to three years. The participants' ages ranged from 16 to 67 years.Meta-analyses for barrier creams, moisturisers, a combination of both barrier creams and moisturisers, or skin protection education showed imprecise effects favouring the intervention. Twenty-nine per cent of participants who applied barrier creams developed signs of OIHD, compared to 33% of the controls, so the risk may be slightly reduced with this measure (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.06; 999 participants; 4 studies; low-quality evidence). However, this risk reduction may not be clinically important. There may be a clinically important protective effect with the use of moisturisers: in the intervention groups, 13% of participants developed symptoms of OIHD compared to 19% of the controls (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.09; 507 participants; 3 studies; low-quality evidence). Likewise, there may be a clinically important protective effect from using a combination of barrier creams and moisturisers: 8% of participants in the intervention group developed signs of OIHD, compared to 13% of the controls (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.42; 474 participants; 2 studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether skin protection education reduces the risk of developing signs of OIHD (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.08; 1355 participants; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence). Twenty-one per cent of participants who received skin protection education developed signs of OIHD, compared to 28% of the controls.None of the studies addressed the frequency of treatment discontinuation due to adverse effects of the products directly. However, in three studies of barrier creams, the reasons for withdrawal from the studies were unrelated to adverse effects. Likewise, in one study of moisturisers plus barrier creams, and in one study of skin protection education, reasons for dropout were unrelated to adverse effects. The remaining studies (one to two in each comparison) reported dropouts without stating how many of them may have been due to adverse reactions to the interventions. We judged the quality of this evidence as moderate, due to the indirectness of the results. The investigated interventions to prevent OIHD probably cause few or no serious adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moisturisers used alone or in combination with barrier creams may result in a clinically important protective effect, either in the long- or short-term, for the primary prevention of OIHD. Barrier creams alone may have slight protective effect, but this does not appear to be clinically important. The results for all of these comparisons were imprecise, and the low quality of the evidence means that our confidence in the effect estimates is limited. For skin protection education, the results varied substantially across the trials, the effect was imprecise, and the pooled risk reduction was not large enough to be clinically important. The very low quality of the evidence means that we are unsure as to whether skin protection education reduces the risk of developing OIHD. The interventions probably cause few or no serious adverse effects.We conclude that at present there is insufficient evidence to confidently assess the effectiveness of interventions used in the primary prevention of OIHD. This does not necessarily mean that current measures are ineffective. Even though the update of this review included larger studies of reasonable quality, there is still a need for trials which apply standardised measures for the detection of OIHD in order to determine the effectiveness of the different prevention strategies.

Determinants of hand dermatitis, urticaria and loss of skin barrier function in professional cleaners in New Zealand

This study assessed the risk of dermatitis, urticaria and loss of skin barrier function in 425 cleaners and 281 reference workers (retail workers and bus drivers). Symptoms, atopy and skin barrier function were assessed by questionnaire, skin prick tests, and measurement of transepidermal water loss. Cleaners had an increased risk of current (past 3 months) hand/arm dermatitis (14.8% vs. 10.0%; OR = 1.9, p < 0.05) and urticaria (11% vs. 5.3%; OR = 2.4, p < 0.05) and were more likely to have dermatitis as adults (17.6% vs. 11.4%; OR = 1.8, p < 0.05). The risk of atopy was not increased, but associations with symptoms were more pronounced in atopics. Transepidermal water loss was significantly higher in cleaners. Wet-work was a significant risk factor for dermatitis and hand washing and drying significantly reduced the risk of urticaria. In conclusion, cleaners have an increased risk of hand/arm dermatitis, urticaria and loss of skin barrier function.

Occupational Skin Disease Prevention: An Educational Intervention for Hairdresser Cosmetology Students

Cosmetologists frequently develop occupational skin disease related to workplace exposures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an educational intervention to increase cosmetology students’ occupational skin disease knowledge and use of preventive practices. A quasi-experimental design was used to evaluate students’ knowledge, behaviors, intentions, expectancies, and expectations. A 20-minute verbal presentation and printed two-page educational handout were provided for participants. Statistically significant increases in knowledge, frequency of glove use, and frequency of moisturizer use were found, but the frequency of handwashing did not increase. In addition, the Behavioral Strategies subscale, the Intention subscale, and the Expectancies subscale showed statistically significant improvements. The results of this study suggest an educational intervention can increase cosmetology students’ knowledge of occupational skin diseases and their use of preventive strategies.

A behavioural change package to prevent hand dermatitis in nurses working in the national health service (the SCIN trial): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background

Hand dermatitis can be a serious health problem in healthcare workers. While a range of skin care strategies and policy directives have been developed in recent years to minimise the risk, their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness remain unclear. Evidence now suggests that psychological theory can facilitate behaviour change with respect to improved hand care practices. Therefore, we will test the hypothesis that a behavioural change intervention to improve hand care, based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour and implementation intentions, coupled with provision of hand moisturisers, can produce a clinically useful reduction in the occurrence of hand dermatitis, when compared to standard care, among nurses working in the UK National Health Service (NHS) who are particularly at risk. Secondary aims will be to assess impacts on participants’ beliefs and behaviour regarding hand care. In addition, we will assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention in comparison with normal care.

Methods/Design

We will conduct a cluster randomised controlled trial at 35 NHS hospital trusts/health boards/universities, focussing on student nurses with a previous history of atopic disease or hand eczema and on nurses in intensive care units.

Nurses at ‘intervention-light’ sites will be managed according to what would currently be regarded as best practice, with provision of an advice leaflet about optimal hand care to prevent hand dermatitis and encouragement to contact their occupational health (OH) department early if hand dermatitis occurs. Nurses at ‘intervention-plus’ sites will additionally receive a behavioural change programme (BCP) with on-going active reinforcement of its messages, and enhanced provision of moisturising cream.

The impact of the interventions will be compared using information collected by questionnaires and through standardised photographs of the hands and wrists, collected at baseline and after 12 months follow-up. In addition, we will assemble relevant economic data for an analysis of costs and benefits, and collect information from various sources to evaluate processes.

Statistical analysis will be by multi-level regression modelling to allow for clustering by site, and will compare the prevalence of outcome measures at follow-up after adjustment for values at baseline. The principal outcome measure will be the prevalence of visible hand dermatitis as assessed by the study dermatologists. In addition, several secondary outcome measures will be assessed.

Discussion

This trial will assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of an intervention to prevent hand dermatitis in nurses in the United Kigdom.

Trial registration

ISRCTN53303171: date of registration, 21 June 2013.

Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticle Penetration into the Skin and Effects on HaCaT Cells

Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO₂NPs) suspensions (concentration 1.0 g/L) in synthetic sweat solution were applied on Franz cells for 24 h using intact and needle-abraded human skin. Titanium content into skin and receiving phases was determined. Cytotoxicity (MTT, AlamarBlue^® and propidium iodide, PI, uptake assays) was evaluated on HaCat keratinocytes after 24 h, 48 h, and seven days of exposure. After 24 h of exposure, no titanium was detectable in receiving solutions for both intact and damaged skin. Titanium was found in the epidermal layer after 24 h of exposure (0.47 ± 0.33 μg/cm²) while in the dermal layer, the concentration was below the limit of detection. Damaged skin, in its whole, has shown a similar concentration (0.53 ± 0.26 μg/cm²). Cytotoxicity studies on HaCaT cells demonstrated that TiO₂NPs induced cytotoxic effects only at very high concentrations, reducing cell viability after seven days of exposure with EC₅₀s of 8.8 × 10⁻⁴ M (MTT assay), 3.8 × 10⁻⁵ M (AlamarBlue^® assay), and 7.6 × 10⁻⁴ M (PI uptake, index of a necrotic cell death). Our study demonstrated that TiO₂NPs cannot permeate intact and damaged skin and can be found only in the stratum corneum and epidermis. Moreover, the low cytotoxic effect observed on human HaCaT keratinocytes suggests that these nano-compounds have a potential toxic effect at the skin level only after long-term exposure.

Cobalt Oxide Nanoparticles: Behavior towards Intact and Impaired Human Skin and Keratinocytes Toxicity

Skin absorption and toxicity on keratinocytes of cobalt oxide nanoparticles (Co₃O₄NPs) have been investigated. Co₃O₄NPs are commonly used in industrial products and biomedicine. There is evidence that these nanoparticles can cause membrane damage and genotoxicity in vitro, but no data are available on their skin absorption and cytotoxicity on keratinocytes. Two independent 24 h in vitro experiments were performed using Franz diffusion cells, using intact (experiment 1) and needle-abraded human skin (experiment 2). Co₃O₄NPs at a concentration of 1000 mg/L in physiological solution were used as donor phase. Cobalt content was evaluated by Inductively Coupled–Mass Spectroscopy. Co permeation through the skin was demonstrated after 24 h only when damaged skin protocol was used (57 ± 38 ng·cm⁻²), while no significant differences were shown between blank cells (0.92 ± 0.03 ng cm⁻²) and those with intact skin (1.08 ± 0.20 ng·cm⁻²). To further investigate Co₃O₄NPs toxicity, human-derived HaCaT keratinocytes were exposed to Co₃O₄NPs and cytotoxicity evaluated by MTT, Alamarblue^® and propidium iodide (PI) uptake assays. The results indicate that a long exposure time (i.e., seven days) was necessary to induce a concentration-dependent cell viability reduction (EC₅₀ values: 1.3 × 10⁻⁴ M, 95% CL = 0.8–1.9 × 10⁻⁴ M, MTT essay; 3.7 × 10⁻⁵ M, 95% CI = 2.2–6.1 × 10⁻⁵ M, AlamarBlue^® assay) that seems to be associated to necrotic events (EC₅₀ value: 1.3 × 10⁻⁴ M, 95% CL = 0.9–1.9 × 10⁻⁴ M, PI assay). This study demonstrated that Co₃O₄NPs can penetrate only damaged skin and is cytotoxic for HaCat cells after long term exposure.

Preventive occupational health interventions in the meat processing industry in upper-middle and high-income countries: a systematic review on their effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of occupational health interventions in the meat processing industry on work and health-related outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed. PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched. Studies were included when they reported on an intervention among employees in the meat processing industry and with outcomes related to work or health. Studies were assessed on risk of bias, and data were synthesized by type of intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 13 articles reporting on two randomized controlled trials and nine non-randomized intervention studies were retrieved. Studies were categorized into three topics: ergonomics programs, skin protection, and Q fever vaccination. All studies had high risk of bias. Based on four studies, there was limited evidence for workplace health and safety programs showing reductions in musculoskeletal injury severity, reduction of lost work days, and reduction of costs and claims for several musculoskeletal disorders. There was limited evidence for added rest breaks resulting in improved productivity at the end of a workday and in reductions of perceived discomfort in various body regions at the end of the workday. One study on skin protection showed reductions of eczema prevalence, although evidence was moderate. Based on four studies, there was high-quality evidence for strong effectiveness of Q fever vaccination.

CONCLUSION

This review presents evidence for the effectiveness of a variety of workplace interventions. There was limited evidence for effectiveness of ergonomic interventions, moderate evidence of a skin protection intervention, and strong evidence for Q fever vaccination.

Chronic hand eczema--self-management and prognosis: a study protocol for a randomised clinical trial

Background

Hand eczema has a one-year prevalence of approximately 10 % in the general Danish population. Often the disease becomes chronic with numerous implications for the individual’s daily life, occupation and quality of life. However, no guidelines of self-management recommendations beyond the acute stage are given. Self-management of the disease is pivotal and involves self-monitoring of the condition, medication adherence, and preventive behaviour. Interventions best to support the individual in this ongoing process need to be developed.

Methods/design

This paper describes the design of a randomised clinical trial to test a newly developed intervention of individual counselling versus conventional information. 300 patients consecutively referred to dermatologic treatment at two different settings are individually randomised to either the intervention programme, named ‘The Healthy Skin Clinic’ or to the control group. Block-wise randomisation according to setting and gender is carried out.

The intervention offers a tool for self-monitoring; basic and specific individual counselling; the possibility of asynchronous communication with the intervention team; and an electronic patient dialogue forum. Primary outcome variable is objective assessment of the hand eczema severity performed at baseline prior to randomisation, and repeated at six months follow-up. Secondary outcome variables are dermatology related life quality and perceived global burden of disease.

Discussion

The trial aims at evaluating a newly developed guidance programme which is expected to support self-management of patients referred to dermatology treatment due to chronic hand eczema. The design of the protocol is pragmatic with blinding of neither participants nor the investigator. Thus, in the interpretation of the results, the investigator takes into account effects that may be attributed to actors of the interventions rather than the intervention per se as well of potential observer bias. Inclusion criterions are wide in order to increase transferability of the results.

Trial registration

The trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.Gov with registration number NCT01482663.