Search

The aim of this study was to investigate the validity of self-patch testing for nickel allergy, in order to determine a cost-effective method for surveillance of the prevalence of nickel allergy. Population-based study including patch testing is the most reliable method to study the prevalence of allergy, but it is expensive and has logistical problems. A total of 191 dermatology patients referred to patch tes-ting were provided with a self-test package with written instructions. The self-test was applied on the arm by the patient, on the same day that the regular patch test was applied on the back. The patient evaluated the self-test before patch test reading at the clinic. Patch test at the dermatology clinic detected 46/191 (24%) nickel-positive individuals. The sensitivity of the self-test was 72% (95% confidence interval (CI) 57-84), the specificity 91% (95% CI 85-95), and the proportion of agreement 86% (95% CI 81-91). Thus, in the population studied, the validity of self-testing for nickel allergy was adequate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To estimate the prevalence of nickel allergy, self-reports are sometimes used in epidemiological studies. Self-reports are practical and may facilitate estimation of prevalence provided that the questions are validated. Objectives: To investigate the validity of self-reported nickel allergy. Methods: Three hundred and sixty-nine women, aged 30–40 years, from the general population participated in the study. The participants answered a questionnaire before a clinical examination and patch testing. The two questions being validated were ‘Are you sensitive/hypersensitive/allergic to nickel?’ and ‘Do you get a rash from metal buttons, jewellery or other metal items that come in direct contact with your skin?’ Results: Patch test showed nickel-positive reaction in 30% of the subjects. Self-reported prevalence of nickel allergy as indicated by the two respective questions was 40% and 35%. Positive predictive values for the two questions were 59% (95% CI 50–67) and 60% (95% CI 51–69). History of childhood eczema was over-represented among women with ‘false-positive’ self-reported nickel allergy ( P = 0.008). Self-reported hand eczema or ‘high wet exposure’ did not influence the validity. Conclusions: The validity of self-reported nickel allergy is low. The questions regarding nickel allergy overestimate the true prevalence of nickel allergy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hand eczema is a chronic disease that results in economic and psychosocial burdens. The aim of this study was to systematically review and assess the magnitude of the association between exposure related to occupations and the incidence rate of hand eczema. A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane databases, from inception to September 2017, of full-text observational studies reporting incident cases of hand eczema during employment, and a supplementary search in PubMed to September 2020, were conducted. Among 2,417 screened abstracts, 15 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Incidence rates were reported per 100 person-years. Based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, 9 studies were good quality, 2 fair quality, and 4 poor quality. Hairdressers had a high incidence of hand eczema of 21.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.3-27.4), as did nurses, 16.9 (95% CI 11.2-22.7), and metal workers, 12.4 (95% CI 3.5-21.3). Hairdressers were predominantly women, and metal worker were predominantly men. Office occupations had an incidence rate of hand eczema of 4.9 (95% CI 1.2-9.6). The high risk of hand eczema for hairdressers, nurses, and metal workers, should be considered by healthcare policymakers. Even occupations with low irritant profile, such as office workers, were at risk of developing hand eczema, and more occupations should be investigated regarding the related risk of developing hand eczema. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]