Position statement: The need for EU legislation to require disclosure and labelling of the composition of medical devices.
Journal
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV
ISSN: 1468-3083
Titre abrégé: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9216037
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Jul 2021
Historique:
received:
24
11
2020
accepted:
08
03
2021
pubmed:
7
5
2021
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
6
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In recent years, skin reactions secondary to the use of medical devices (MD), such as allergic contact dermatitis have increasingly been observed (e.g. to continuous blood sugar monitoring systems, insulin pumps, wound dressings, medical gloves, etc.): this is regarded as a developing epidemic. Lack of labelling of the composition of MD, as well as frequent lack of cooperation of manufacturers to disclose this relevant information, even when contacted by the clinician for the individual case of an established adverse reaction, significantly impede patient care. To advocate for full ingredient labelling in the implementation of EU regulation for MD. This position paper reviews the scientific literature, the current regulatory framework adopted for MD to date, and the likely impact, including some costs data in case of the absence of such labelling. Efforts made by several scientific teams, who are trying to identify the culprit of such adverse effects, either via asking for cooperation from companies, or using costly chemical analyses of MD, can only partly, and with considerable delay, compensate for the absence of meaningful information on the composition of MD; hence, patient management is compromised. Indeed, without knowing the chemical substances present, physicians are unable to inform patients about which substances they should avoid, and which alternative MD may be suitable/tolerated. There is an urgent need for full and accurate labelling of the chemical composition of MD in contact with the human body.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In recent years, skin reactions secondary to the use of medical devices (MD), such as allergic contact dermatitis have increasingly been observed (e.g. to continuous blood sugar monitoring systems, insulin pumps, wound dressings, medical gloves, etc.): this is regarded as a developing epidemic. Lack of labelling of the composition of MD, as well as frequent lack of cooperation of manufacturers to disclose this relevant information, even when contacted by the clinician for the individual case of an established adverse reaction, significantly impede patient care.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To advocate for full ingredient labelling in the implementation of EU regulation for MD.
METHODS
METHODS
This position paper reviews the scientific literature, the current regulatory framework adopted for MD to date, and the likely impact, including some costs data in case of the absence of such labelling.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Efforts made by several scientific teams, who are trying to identify the culprit of such adverse effects, either via asking for cooperation from companies, or using costly chemical analyses of MD, can only partly, and with considerable delay, compensate for the absence of meaningful information on the composition of MD; hence, patient management is compromised. Indeed, without knowing the chemical substances present, physicians are unable to inform patients about which substances they should avoid, and which alternative MD may be suitable/tolerated.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
There is an urgent need for full and accurate labelling of the chemical composition of MD in contact with the human body.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33955077
doi: 10.1111/jdv.17238
pmc: PMC8251888
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1444-1448Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
Références
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Aug;79(2):115-117
pubmed: 29708580
Contact Dermatitis. 2019 Jan;80(1):61-62
pubmed: 30304758
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018 May;12(3):630-633
pubmed: 29542347
Contact Dermatitis. 2019 Sep;81(3):167-173
pubmed: 30891769
Contact Dermatitis. 2017 Dec;77(6):426-429
pubmed: 29164694
Contact Dermatitis. 2016 Feb;74(2):124-5
pubmed: 26763993
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Nov;79(5):320-321
pubmed: 30039529
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Sep;79(3):191-193
pubmed: 29774553
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020 Sep;22(9):658-665
pubmed: 31800294
Dermatitis. 2020 Mar/Apr;31(2):128-133
pubmed: 32168144
Diabetologia. 2015 May;58(5):862-70
pubmed: 25784563
J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol. 2017;27(4):272-273
pubmed: 28731418
Contact Dermatitis. 2013 Dec;69(6):379-81
pubmed: 24215527
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Aug;79(2):76-80
pubmed: 29635853
Contact Dermatitis. 2009 Jun;60(6):303-13
pubmed: 19489964
Diabetes Care. 2020 Apr;43(4):918-920
pubmed: 32054722
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Dec;79(6):396-397
pubmed: 30198186
Contact Dermatitis. 1985 May;12(5):280
pubmed: 4028704
Contact Dermatitis. 2017 Dec;77(6):367-373
pubmed: 28804907
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Jan;78(1):28-32
pubmed: 28748553
Contact Dermatitis. 2019 Jul;81(1):27-31
pubmed: 30773644
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Aug;79(2):81-84
pubmed: 29888412
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018 Aug;20(8):566-570
pubmed: 30044134
Dermatitis. 2017 Jul/Aug;28(4):289-291
pubmed: 28538007
Pediatr Diabetes. 2018 Jun;19(4):733-740
pubmed: 29484783