Glove-related hand urticaria: an increasing occupational problem among healthcare workers

Comparative Assessment of Hypersensitivity Reactions on Use of Latex and Nitrile Gloves Among General Dental Practitioners: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background  Latex gloves are used more frequently by dental, medical, and other health workers and their allergy has also increased as a result, dentists are frequently exposed to latex or nitrile gloves for extended periods. This prolonged exposure often leads to local symptoms such as itching and erythema rashes. However, some dentists experience more severe systemic reactions, including swelling, wheezing, breathlessness, and even an increase in blood pressure. Latex gloves have recently been replaced with nitrile gloves, powder-free latex gloves, and other preventive measures to avoid allergies. Latex allergies are more common than nitrile allergies, as they are hypoallergic with properties such as tear-resistant and provide an equivalent level of defense against various dental materials and procedures. Women experience more allergic reactions than men. Not only are dentists exposed to this allergy but the patient can also be exposed during the procedure. This study aimed to assess hypersensitive reactions to the use of latex and nitrile gloves among general dentist practitioners and dental students. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in Wardha, Maharashtra, India, to evaluate allergic reactions to latex and nitrile gloves among general dental practitioners and dental students at college. A questionnaire-based study was conducted with a sample size of 356. The self-administered survey inquiries about glove compliance, the time they wear the gloves, regular glove use, and problems related to latex or nitrile contact. In addition, dentists and dental students' personal histories of allergies to medications, dental materials, disinfectants, or other chemicals were noted, as well as signs and symptoms they experienced from prolonged contact with gloves. Result The total number of responses collected was 356. The investigated dentists were 274 and 82 were students, out of which 122 (34.3%) were male and 234 (65.7%) were female. Responses showed that 224 (62.92%) used latex gloves, and 132 (37.08%) used nitrile gloves. Among 356 participants 175 showed symptoms by the use of both latex and nitrile gloves, out of which 85.14% showed allergy to latex and 14.85% to nitrile gloves. All 175 individuals showed type IV hypersensitivity, and none of them showed type I. Conclusion Latex gloves are not the only option for dentists who experience itching when wearing gloves; they can also use powered-free latex gloves and nitrile gloves or take precautions such as not using oil-based cream, washing their hands, or taking pharmaceuticals such as cetirizine, pheniramine maleate, etc. However, when symptoms worsen and include erythema, swelling, wheezing, and in some cases, anaphylactic shock may occur they tend to use alternative gloves.

Indirect consequences of coronavirus disease 2019: Skin lesions caused by the frequent hand sanitation and use of personal protective equipment and strategies for their prevention

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) enforced the use of hand sanitation and of personal protective equipment, such as masks and visors, especially by health‐care professionals, but also by the general public. However, frequent hand sanitation and the prolonged and continuous use of personal protective equipment are responsible for constant frictional and pressure forces on skin causing lesions, the most reported being acne, facial itching, dryness, and rash. Thus, it is important to find measures to prevent skin lesions, in order to improve the quality of life of health‐care professionals and of the general public. This article gathers the current information regarding measures to prevent human to human transmission of COVID‐19, reviews the most common skin lesions caused by the use of hand sanitizers and different types of personal protective equipment, and the possible preventive measures that can be used on a daily basis to minimize the risk of developing skin‐related pathologies. Daily skin care routines and the incorporation of a dressing between the skin and the personal protective equipment to serve as a protective barrier are some of the applied measures. Moisturizers and dressings improve the skin's ability to respond to constant aggressions. Lastly, the need for additional studies to evaluate the lubrication properties of different types of dressings is discussed. The understanding of what kind of dressing is more suitable to prevent pressure injuries is crucial to promote healthy skin and wellbeing during pandemic times.

Making Glove Decision Less of a White Knuckling Experience: A Systematic Review and Inventory of Glove Accelerator Contents

Background

Accelerators in medical gloves are a common cause of allergic contact dermatitis among healthcare workers.

Objective

A systematic review of medical and nursing literature, patch testing reports, and chemical analyses of gloves was conducted to assess accelerator contents reported in the literature and to identify accelerator-free gloves.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in OVID Medline and OVID EMBASE. Hand-searching of reference lists of articles in the field and author input generated the remainder of articles assessed.

Results

We present an inventory of accelerator contents of gloves and accelerator-free glove options as reported in the literature as a clinical reference tool to assist allergen-free glove selection for individuals suffering from allergic contact dermatitis due to rubber accelerators.

Limitations

Pertinent limitations of our review include lack of predefined study exclusion criteria and screening of the studies identified in the search by 1 review author only.

Conclusion

The glove inventory we provide summarizes the available literature regarding medical and surgical glove accelerator content, describing gloves both by brand and manufacturer as well as by accelerators.

Occupational dermatoses among healthcare workers in a hospital center in Portugal

BACKGROUND

Skin diseases account for more than 35% of occupational diseases, affecting 1/1,000 workers annually.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize occupational dermatoses affecting hospital workers and identify possible triggers and susceptibility factors.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study in which we analyzed information extracted from electronic medical records of workers who performed periodic examinations in the course of one year.

RESULTS

About 3.56% of 1,741 included workers had a diagnosis of occupational dermatosis, being mainly women (76.85%). Thirty-four (54.84%) of the affected workers had irritant contact dermatitis, 17 (27.42%) latex allergy, 6 (9.68%) allergic dermatitis, and 5 (8.06%) two concomitant conditions. We found significant difference in prevalence as a function of occupational group (p=0.008), being highest for nursing assistants (5.11%). Prevalence was also higher for employees allocated to surgery departments (8.47%, p=0.001). Main triggers were skin disinfectants, latex, nitrile gloves, and prolonged contact with water (4.84%).

CONCLUSION

The quality of the analyzed data depends on the quality of the analyzed medical records. Most subjects were nursing assistants, which fact hinders the generalization of the results. The prevalence of occupational dermatosis was just 3.56%, which might be explained by previously implemented preventive measures. The employees most frequently affected were those allocated to surgery departments and nursing assistants. Skin disinfectants were the most frequent triggers.

Skin reactions to latex in dental professionals - first Croatian data

Purpose. To determine the prevalence of undesirable skin reactions to latex in dental professionals and students of the School of Dental Medicine in Zagreb, Croatia. Methods. Our research included 444 participants, of which 200 agreed to undergo a skin prick test (SPT). All participants answered a questionnaire in which we asked about incidence of skin lesions, duration of occupational exposure to latex, localization of skin lesions and symptoms. Statistical analysis of the questionnaire and test results was then carried out. Results. Of the total 444 participants surveyed, 249 (56.1%) reported lesions on their skin (professionals 64.8%, students 6.1-58.5%). From the questionnaire, 239 (96.0%) respondents reported lesions on the hands and fingers, mostly in the form of erythema (37.0%) and occasional dryness of skin (29.0%). Positive SPT results were found in 14 (7.0%) out of the 200 respondents who underwent the test. Conclusions. While a large number of subjects (56.1%) reported skin lesions when using latex products at their workplace, the SPT test was positive only in 7.0%. The results show that the prevalence of self-reported skin lesions was significantly related to the length of occupational exposure, with a substantial effect size (p < 0.001; V = 0.334).