Occupationally Related Nickel Reactions: A Retrospective Analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data 1998-2016.


Journal

Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug
ISSN: 2162-5220
Titre abrégé: Dermatitis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101207335

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Historique:
entrez: 17 9 2019
pubmed: 17 9 2019
medline: 23 2 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The epidemiology of nickel allergy in occupational settings is not well understood. The aim of the study was to characterize occupationally related nickel allergy (ORNA). This is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 44,378 patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 1998 to 2016. Characteristics of individuals with ORNA were compared with those with non-ORNA (NORNA). A total of 7928 (18.2%) individuals were positive to nickel sulfate 2.5%. Two hundred sixty-eight (3.4%) had ORNA. As compared with NORNA, ORNA was statistically associated with the male sex (41.0% vs 12.9%, P < 0.001), a diagnosis of irritant contact dermatitis (22.4% vs 12.0%, P < 0.001), and no history of eczema (81.7% vs 75.7%, P = 0.0217). The most common sites of ORNA dermatitis were hand (39.9%) and arm (18.1%), which were significantly more common than in NORNA (P < 0.0001). Sixteen industry categories and 22 occupation categories were identified for ORNA; the most common industries were durable goods manufacturing (24.6%) and personal services (15.7%), and the most frequent occupations were hairdressers/cosmetologists/barbers (14.3%), machine operators (9.3%), and health care workers (7.1%). Overall 30% of ORNA occupations were in metalworking. Of 215 ORNA sources identified, instruments/phones/other equipment (16.3%), vehicles/machinery (15.8%), and tools (15.3%) were the most common. Occupational nickel allergy is distinct from nonoccupational nickel allergy.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The epidemiology of nickel allergy in occupational settings is not well understood.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
The aim of the study was to characterize occupationally related nickel allergy (ORNA).
METHODS METHODS
This is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 44,378 patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 1998 to 2016. Characteristics of individuals with ORNA were compared with those with non-ORNA (NORNA).
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 7928 (18.2%) individuals were positive to nickel sulfate 2.5%. Two hundred sixty-eight (3.4%) had ORNA. As compared with NORNA, ORNA was statistically associated with the male sex (41.0% vs 12.9%, P < 0.001), a diagnosis of irritant contact dermatitis (22.4% vs 12.0%, P < 0.001), and no history of eczema (81.7% vs 75.7%, P = 0.0217). The most common sites of ORNA dermatitis were hand (39.9%) and arm (18.1%), which were significantly more common than in NORNA (P < 0.0001). Sixteen industry categories and 22 occupation categories were identified for ORNA; the most common industries were durable goods manufacturing (24.6%) and personal services (15.7%), and the most frequent occupations were hairdressers/cosmetologists/barbers (14.3%), machine operators (9.3%), and health care workers (7.1%). Overall 30% of ORNA occupations were in metalworking. Of 215 ORNA sources identified, instruments/phones/other equipment (16.3%), vehicles/machinery (15.8%), and tools (15.3%) were the most common.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Occupational nickel allergy is distinct from nonoccupational nickel allergy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31524759
doi: 10.1097/DER.0000000000000516
pii: 01206501-201909000-00005
doi:

Substances chimiques

Nickel 7OV03QG267

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

306-313

Auteurs

Erin M Warshaw (EM)

From the Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center.
Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota.

Jamie P Schlarbaum (JP)

From the Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center.
University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis.

Joel G DeKoven (JG)

Division of Dermatology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Jonathan I Silverberg (JI)

Department of Dermatology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL.

Kathryn A Zug (KA)

Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH.

James G Marks (JG)

Department of Dermatology, Pennsylvania State University, State College.

Donald V Belsito (DV)

Department of Dermatology, Columbia University, New York, NY.

Toby Mathias (T)

Department of Dermatology, University of Cincinnati, OH.

Margo J Reeder (MJ)

Department of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison.

Amber R Atwater (AR)

Department of Dermatology, Duke University, Durham, NC.

Howard I Maibach (HI)

Department of Dermatology, University of California San Francisco.

Denis Sasseville (D)

Division of Dermatology, Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Matthew J Zirwas (MJ)

Department of Dermatology, Ohio State University, Columbus.

Anthony F Fransway (AF)

Associates in Dermatology, Fort Myers, FL.

Melanie D Pratt (MD)

Division of Dermatology, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Vincent A DeLeo (VA)

Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA.

Joseph F Fowler (JF)

University of Louisville, KY.

James S Taylor (JS)

Department of Dermatology, Cleveland Clinic, OH.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH