Acceptance of semipermeable glove liners compared to cotton glove liners in health care workers with work-related skin diseases: Results of a quasi-randomized trial under real workplace conditions.
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact
/ prevention & control
Dermatitis, Occupational
/ prevention & control
Gloves, Protective
/ statistics & numerical data
Hand
/ physiology
Hand Dermatoses
/ prevention & control
Health Personnel
/ statistics & numerical data
Humans
Permeability
Skin Physiological Phenomena
Sympatex
cotton
eczema
gloves
health personnel
liners
membrane
occlusion
semipermeable
Journal
Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
revised:
08
06
2021
received:
22
04
2021
accepted:
05
07
2021
pubmed:
8
7
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
entrez:
7
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Glove liners (GLs) made of cotton (COT) are worn under impermeable gloves to prevent occlusion effects. Semipermeable GLs made of Sympatex (SYM) might be an alternative. To evaluate the acceptance of GLs (COT/SYM) in health care workers (HCWs) with work-related skin diseases (WRSDs). One hundred sixty-one HCWs with WRSDs were asked to wear GLs in combination with occlusive gloves for 10 ±2 weeks under workplace conditions. A questionnaire was applied to compare acceptance and usability of the respective glove combinations and previously used protective gloves (PUGs). A total of 120 data sets were available (SYM: n = 65, 77.4%; COT: n = 55, 71.4%). Both GLs provided a significantly lower sweating sensation, more pleasant climate, comfortable wearing experience, and moist or dry feeling on the skin compared to PUGs. SYM-GLs performed significantly better than COT-GLs regarding mobility of hands, sensitivity, and sense of touch. COT-GLs were significantly better than SYM-GLs in the categories fit, donning and doffing, and material contact. Both GLs did not impair work performance, were applicable in various areas of health care activities, and were preferred over PUGs. Our results indicate that SYM-GLs are an alternative to COT-GLs and thus may contribute to current prevention strategies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Glove liners (GLs) made of cotton (COT) are worn under impermeable gloves to prevent occlusion effects. Semipermeable GLs made of Sympatex (SYM) might be an alternative.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the acceptance of GLs (COT/SYM) in health care workers (HCWs) with work-related skin diseases (WRSDs).
METHODS
METHODS
One hundred sixty-one HCWs with WRSDs were asked to wear GLs in combination with occlusive gloves for 10 ±2 weeks under workplace conditions. A questionnaire was applied to compare acceptance and usability of the respective glove combinations and previously used protective gloves (PUGs).
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 120 data sets were available (SYM: n = 65, 77.4%; COT: n = 55, 71.4%). Both GLs provided a significantly lower sweating sensation, more pleasant climate, comfortable wearing experience, and moist or dry feeling on the skin compared to PUGs. SYM-GLs performed significantly better than COT-GLs regarding mobility of hands, sensitivity, and sense of touch. COT-GLs were significantly better than SYM-GLs in the categories fit, donning and doffing, and material contact.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Both GLs did not impair work performance, were applicable in various areas of health care activities, and were preferred over PUGs. Our results indicate that SYM-GLs are an alternative to COT-GLs and thus may contribute to current prevention strategies.
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
543-553Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Reddy R, Maibach HI, Belsito DV. Healthcare workers. In: John S, Johansen J, Rustemeyer T, Elsner P, Maibach H, eds. Kanerva's Occupational Dermatology, 3rd. Rev ed. Cham: Springer; 2020:2061-2071..
Larese Filon F, Pesce M, Paulo M, et al. Incidence of occupational contact dermatitis in healthcare workers: a systematic review. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2021;35(6):1285-1289.
Ibler KS, Jemec GB, Flyvholm MA, Diepgen TL, Jensen A, Agner T. Hand eczema: prevalence and risk factors of hand eczema in a population of 2274 healthcare workers. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67(4):200-207.
Hamnerius N, Svedman C, Bergendorff O, Björk J, Bruze M, Pontén A. Wet work exposure and hand eczema among healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study. Br J Dermatol. 2018;178(2):452-461.
Council Directive of November 30, 1989 on the minimum health and safety requirements for the use by workers of personal protective equipment at the workplace (third individual directive within the meaning of Article 16 [1] of Directive 89/391/EEC) (89/656/EEC). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A01989L0656-20191120. Accessed September 15, 2020.
Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA). TRGS-401: Risks resulting from skin contact - determination, evaluation, measures, 2008. https://www.baua.de/EN/Service/Legislative-texts-and-technical-rules/Rules/TRGS/TRGS-401.html. Accessed April 11, 2020.
Diepgen TL, Andersen KE, Chosidow O, et al. Guidelines for diagnosis, prevention and treatment of hand eczema. JDDG: Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft. 2015;13(1):e1-e22.
Fonacier L, Bernstein DI, Pacheco K, et al. Contact dermatitis: a practice parameter-update 2015. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2015;3(3):S1-S39.
Wulfhorst B, Strunk M, Skudlik C, , et al. Rehabilitation and prevention of hand eczema. In: Johansen J, Mahler V, Lepoittevin JP, Frosch P, eds. Contact Dermatitis. 6th ed. Cham: Springer; 2020:1-48..
Council Directive 93/42/EEC of June 14, 1993 concerning medical devices. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1993/42/oj. Accessed September 15, 2020.
Tiedemann D, Ml C, John SM, Angelova-Fischer I, Kezic S, Agner T. Effect of glove occlusion on the skin barrier. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;74(1):2-10.
Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA). TRBA 250: Biological agents in health care and welfare facilities, 2014. https://www.baua.de/EN/Service/Legislative-texts-and-technical-rules/Rules/TRBA/TRBA-250.html. Accessed April 11, 2020.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff January. Medical Glove Guidance Manual. FDA-2020-D-0957, 2008. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/medical-glove-guidance-manual. Accessed July 21, 2020.
Adisesh A, Robinson E, Nicholson PJ, Sen D. Wilkinson M; standards of care working group. U.K. standards of care for occupational contact dermatitis and occupational contact urticaria. Br J Dermatol. 2013;168(6):1167-1175.
Agner T, Held E. Skin protection programmes. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;47(5):253-256.
Jungbauer FH, van der Vleuten P, Groothoff JW, Coenraads PJ. Irritant hand dermatitis: severity of disease, occupational exposure to skin irritants and preventive measures 5 years after initial diagnosis. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;50(4):245-251.
Flyvholm MA, Bach B, Rose M, Jepsen KF. Self-reported hand eczema in a hospital population. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57(2):110-115.
Weisshaar E, Radulescu M, Bock M, Albrecht U, Diepgen TL. Educational and dermatological aspects of secondary individual prevention in healthcare workers. Contact Dermatitis. 2006;54(5):254-260.
Fisher LB, Maibach HI. The effect of occlusive and semipermeable dressings on the mitotic activity of normal and wounded human epidermis. Br J Dermatol. 1972;86(6):593-600.
Grubauer G, Elias PM, Feingold KR. Transepidermal water loss: the signal for recovery of barrier structure and function. J Lipid Res. 1989;30(3):323-333.
Welzel J, Wilhelm KP, Wolff HH. Skin permeability barrier and occlusion: no delay of repair in irritated human skin. Contact Dermatitis. 1996;35(3):163-168.
Visscher M, Hoath SB, Conroy E, Randall WR. Effect of semipermeable membranes on skin barrier repair following tape stripping. Arch Dermatol Res. 2001;293(10):491-499.
Scheman A, Osburn A. Use of a breathable glove liner for prevention of delayed hypersensitivity to rubber accelerators. J Occup Environ Med. 1997;39(7):605.
Hamilton RG, Adkinson NF Jr. Validation of the latex glove provocation procedure in latex-allergic subjects. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1997;79(3):266-272.
Wulfhorst B, Schwanitz HJ, Bock M. Optimizing skin protection with semipermeable gloves. Dermatitis. 2004;15(4):184-191.
Damer K. Epidermale Permeabilitätsbarriere Irritabilität und Regeneration in Abhängigkeit von psychischen Faktoren. Regeneration unter impermeablen und semipermeablen Handschuhmaterialien. Psychologische und hautphysiologische Untersuchungen [Dissertation]. Osnabrück: Osnabrück University, GER; 2005. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:gbv:700-2006080228
Bock M, Damer K, Wulfhorst B, John SM. Semipermeable glove membranes-effects on skin barrier repair following SLS irritation. Contact Dermatitis. 2009;61(5):276-280.
Sonsmann FK, Bock M, John SM. Semipermeable Unterziehhandschuhe zur Verminderung negativer Okklusionseffekte. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2011a;9(s1):163.
Sonsmann FK, John SM, Gediga K, Maurer J, Wilke A, Strunk M. Überprüfung der Anwenderakzeptanz von semipermeablen Unterziehhandschuhen - Ergebnisse einer Vorstudie. Dermatol Beruf Umwelt. 2015;63(3):129.
Dulon M, Pohrt U, Skudlik C, Nienhaus A. Prevention of occupational skin disease: a workplace intervention study in geriatric nurses. Br J Dermatol. 2009;161(2):337-344.
John SM. Occupational skin diseases: options for multidisciplinary networking in preventive medicine. Ger Med Sci. 2008;6:Doc07. https://www.egms.de/static/de/journals/gms/2008-6/000052.shtml.
World Medical Association. World medical association declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191-21914.
Baack BR, Holguin TA, Holmes HS, Prawer SE, Scheman AJ. Use of a semipermeable glove during treatment of hand dermatitis. Cutis. 1996;588(6):423-424.
Hübner NO, Rubbert K, Pohrt U, et al. Einsatz wiederaufbereitbarer textiler Unterziehhandschuhe für medizinische Tätigkeiten: eine Machbarkeitsstudie. Zbl Chirurgie. 2016;141(01):62.
Schmidt K, Kersten N, Pohrt U. The use of protective gloves in occupational skin disease prevention: feasibility and customer acceptance in physiotherapy. Int J Physiother. 2016;3(4):401-408.
Gebben B. A water vapor-permeable membrane from block copolymers of poly(butylene terephthalate) and polyethylene oxide. J Membr Sci. 1996;113(2):323-329.
van der Meer EW, van der Gulden JW, van Dongen D, Boot CR, Anema JR. Barriers and facilitators in the implementation of recommendations for hand eczema prevention among healthcare workers. Contact Dermatitis. 2015;72(5):325-336.
Ricci G, Patrizi A, Bellini F, Medri M. Use of textiles in atopic dermatitis. In: Hipler UC, Elsner P, eds. Biofunctional Textiles and the Skin. Curr Probl Dermatol. Vol 33. Basel: Karger; 2006:127-143. https://doi.org/10.1159/000093940.
Sonsmann FK, Bock M, John SM. Einsatz semipermeabler Membranen in der Prävention und Kuration berufsbedingter Hauterkrankungen bei Personen mit atopischer Disposition. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2011b;9(s1):130.
Strunk M, Maurer J, Sonsmann FK, John SM. Barriereregenerierende Effekte durch die Verwendung semipermeabler Handschuhmembranen unter okklusiven Schutzhandschuhen. Dermatol Beruf Umwelt. 2015;63(3):130.
Mylon P, Lewis R, Carré MJ, Martin N. A critical review of glove and hand research with regard to medical glove design. Ergonomics. 2014;57(1):116-129.
Dababneh AJ, Schwab PA. Impact of gloves on user performance and comfort in the semiconductor industry. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf Serv Indus. 2015;25(6):638-645.
Bradley JV. Effect of gloves on control operation time. Hum Factors. 1969;11(1):13-20.
Cochran DJ, Albin TJ, Bishu RR, Riley MW. An analysis of grasp force degradation with commercially available gloves. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet. 1986;30(8):852-855.
Bishu RR, Goodwin B. Evaluation of gloves: short time test vs. long time tests. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet. 1997;41(1):692-696.
Bishu RR, Chin A. Inner gloves: how good are they? In: Kumar S, ed. Advances in Occupational Ergonomics and Safety: proceedings of the XIIIth Annual International Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference 1998. Amsterdam, Berlin, Oxford, Tokyo, Washington, DC: IDS Press; 1998:397-400.
Kovacs K, Splittstoesser R, Maronitis A, Marras WS. Grip force and muscle activity differences due to glove type. AIHA J (Fairfax, Va). 2002;63(3):269-274.
Tremblay-Lutter JF, Lang JQ, Pichette D. Evaluation of candidate glove liners for reduction of skin maceration in chemical protective gloves. In: Johnson JS, Mansdorf SZ, eds. Performance of Protective Clothing, ASTM STP 1237. Vol 5. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 1996:296-310. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP14076S.
Uter W, Schwanitz HJ. Hairdressing. In: Chew AL, Maibach HI, eds. Irritant Dermatitis. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2006:123-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-31294-3_14.
Walczak DA, Pawełczak D, Grobelski B, Pasieka Z. Surgical gloves-do they really protect us? Pol Przegl Chir. 2014;86(5):238-243.
Sonsmann F, John SM, Hansen A, et al. Betrieblicher Hautschutz - Auswahl geeigneter Schutzhandschuhe. BPUVZ. 2015;(3):129-134. https://doi.org/10.37307/j.2193-3308.2015.03.09.
Wilke A, Skudlik C, Sonsmann FK. Individualprävention beruflicher Kontaktekzeme: Schutzhandschuhe und Hautschutzempfehlungen im berufsgenossenschaftlichen Heilverfahren. Der Hautarzt. 2018;69(6):449-461.