Military medicine · 1995
Epidemiology of hand dermatitis in dental personnel.
СтатьяПоддержка правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Uveges R E, Grimwood R E, Slawsky L D, Marks J G
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Dental personnel are prone to frequent bouts of hand dermatitis. This has been attributed to hand washing, occupational exposure to a multitude of possible sensitizers, and frequent latex glove use. There has been some conflict in the literature as to the true frequency of allergic contact dermatitis in dental personnel.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to quantify the frequency of allergic contact dermatitis and contact urticaria in a large group of Air Force dental personnel.
METHODS: Four hundred forty-nine dental personnel were surveyed for hand dermatitis. Positive responders were interviewed and examined. Patients with histories most consistent with allergic contact dermatitis were patch tested to a standard and a dental tray.
RESULTS: Of the 449 personnel completing our survey, 169 had a positive history of hand dermatitis. One hundred twenty of these were interviewed and examined, of which 27 patients gave a history most consistent with allergic contact dermatitis and were subjected to patch testing. Only 3 patients had relevant positive reactions to the allergens on the standard or dental trays. All others (93) were diagnosed with irritant contact dermatitis. None had contact urticaria to latex.
CONCLUSION: The frequency of hand dermatitis in our dental personnel is consistent with that in other published studies (37.6%). The majority of hand dermatitis occurring in this group is due to irritant contact dermatitis; the frequency of allergic contact dermatitis is very low (0.67%). None had contact urticaria.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to quantify the frequency of allergic contact dermatitis and contact urticaria in a large group of Air Force dental personnel.
METHODS: Four hundred forty-nine dental personnel were surveyed for hand dermatitis. Positive responders were interviewed and examined. Patients with histories most consistent with allergic contact dermatitis were patch tested to a standard and a dental tray.
RESULTS: Of the 449 personnel completing our survey, 169 had a positive history of hand dermatitis. One hundred twenty of these were interviewed and examined, of which 27 patients gave a history most consistent with allergic contact dermatitis and were subjected to patch testing. Only 3 patients had relevant positive reactions to the allergens on the standard or dental trays. All others (93) were diagnosed with irritant contact dermatitis. None had contact urticaria to latex.
CONCLUSION: The frequency of hand dermatitis in our dental personnel is consistent with that in other published studies (37.6%). The majority of hand dermatitis occurring in this group is due to irritant contact dermatitis; the frequency of allergic contact dermatitis is very low (0.67%). None had contact urticaria.