Prevalence, pattern, contact sensitisers and impact on quality-of-life of occupational dermatitis among beekeepers in North India.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Beekeepers face specific occupational health risks due to exposure to bee products and chemicals. Propolis is a notable cause of contact hypersensitivity in beekeepers. Its chemical composition varies by region, complicating allergy investigations. While propolis allergies are documented in Western populations, no studies exist in India.
AIM: To assess the prevalence and patterns of dermatitis among beekeepers, identify contact sensitisers and evaluate its impact on quality-of-life (QoL).
METHODS
An 18-month community-based cross-sectional study was conducted involving 340 beekeepers from the Kashmir Valley in North India. Data collection included personal interviews, dermatological examinations and patch testing using self-made antigens of propolis, beeswax, royal jelly and standardised Baseline Indian Standard Series. The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was used to measure the impact of dermatitis on QoL.
RESULTS
Dermatitis prevalence among beekeepers was 17.1%, with the majority presenting with hand eczema. Onset or worsening of dermatitis was reported by 77.6% after working in apiaries. Significant associations were found with duration of beekeeping (p < 0.05) and a history of atopy (p < 0.001). Patch testing revealed 27.5% of beekeepers with positive reactions, primarily to propolis (10% in pet). The mean DLQI score was 3.5, indicating a generally small impact on QoL.
CONCLUSION
Dermatitis was a common occupational condition among beekeepers, strongly associated with the duration of beekeeping and a history of atopy, though its overall impact on QoL was limited. Propolis emerged as a primary sensitiser in the study population.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.