Advertisement

Surveillance in Occupational Contact Dermatitis

  • Wolfgang Uter
Living reference work entry

Abstract

Surveillance of occupational contact dermatitis addresses time trends and subgroups at risk. Preferably, surveillance should be based on robust, reliable, and valid classification systems both of morbidity and exposure(s). Moreover, surveillance needs to be detailed enough to be valuable, in particular concerning contact allergy to various defined substances (haptens). Data used for surveillance need a sufficient level of methodological standardization, e.g., for patch testing used to diagnose contact allergy. Internationally, a number of surveillance schemes for occupational diseases, including occupational skin diseases, have been implemented. These are described and discussed briefly in the present chapter. In addition to such on-going schemes, special projects provided some insights into the usefulness of the different methods used. Clinical surveillance of contact allergy, based on clinical and demographic as well as patch test data collected within (inter)national networks, can contribute to surveillance from another perspective, and usually with some more detail concerning causative allergens.

Keywords

Contact allergy Contact dermatitis Epidemiology Occupational Surveillance 

References

  1. Alfonso JH, Lvseth EK, Samant Y, Holm J-Ø (2015) Work-related skin diseases in Norway may be underreported: data from 2000 to 2013. Contact Dermatitis 72:409–412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Alfonso JH, Barbaud A, Bauer A, Boman A, Bubas M, Constandt G, Crépy M-N, Gergovska M, Giménez-Arnau AM, Goncalo M, Macan J, Mahler V, Mijakoski D, Ramada Rodilla JM, Rustemeyer T, Spring P, John SM, Uter W, Wilkinson SM (2017) Minimum standards on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of occupational and work-related skin diseases in Europe – position paper of the COST Action StanDerm (TD 1206). JEADV 31 (Suppl 4):31–43Google Scholar
  3. Anonymous (2004) Medical aspects of occupational skin disease. Guidance Note MS 24. Health and Safety Executive, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  4. Cherry N, Meyer JD, Adisesh A, Brooke R, Owen-Smith V, Swales C, Beck MH (2000) Surveillance of occupational skin disease: EPIDERM and OPRA. Br J Dermatol 142:1128–1134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dickel H, Kuss O, Blesius CR, Schmidt A, Diepgen TL (2001a) Occupational skin diseases in Northern Bavaria between 1990 and 1999: a population-based study. Br J Dermatol 145:453–462CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dickel H, Uter W, Schmidt A et al (2001b) Auswertung von Datenbanken bzw. Registern von Hauttestergebnissen zur Relevanz arbeitsbedingter Faktoren (Schriftenreihe der Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin: Forschungsbericht, Fb 939). Wirtschaftsverlag NW Verlag für neue Wissenschaft GmbH, BremerhavenGoogle Scholar
  7. Dickel H, Bruckner T, Bernhard-Klimt C, Koch T, Scheidt R, Diepgen TL (2002) Surveillance scheme for occupational skin disease in the Saarland, FRG. First report from BKH-S. Contact Dermatitis 46:197–206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Geier J, Lessmann H, Mahler V, Pohrt U, Uter W, Schnuch A (2012) Occupational contact allergy caused by rubber gloves–nothing has changed. Contact Dermatitis 67:149–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Johansen JD, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T, Andersen KE, Bircher A, Bruze M, Cannavó A, Giménez-Arnau A, Gonçalo M, Goossens A, John SM, Lidén C, Lindberg M, Mahler V, Matura M, Rustemeyer T, Serup J, Spiewak R, Thyssen JP, Vigan M, White IR, Wilkinson M, Uter W (2015) European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing – recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis 73:195–221CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R et al (2000) Incidence rates of occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by metals. Am J Cont Derm 11:155–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Last JM (1995) A dictionary of epidemiology. Oxford University Press, New York/Oxford/TorontoGoogle Scholar
  12. Mahler V, Aalto-Korte K, Alfonso JH, Bakker J, Bauer A, Bensefa-Colas L, Boman A, Bourke J, Bubas M, Bulat P, Chaloupka J, Chomiczewska-Skora D, Constandt L, Danielsen TE, Darlenski R, Dugonik A, Giménez-Arnau AM, Goncalo M, Johansen JD, John SM, Kieć-Świerczyńska M, Koch P, Kohánka V, Krcisz B, Larese Filon F, Ljubojević S, Macan J, Marinović B, Matura M, Mihatsch P, Mijakoski D, Pace J, Pesonen M, Ramada Rodilla JM, Rast H, Reljic V, Salavastru C, Schuster C, Schuttelaar M-L, Simon D, Spiewak R, Tončić RJ, Urbanček S, Valiukevičienė S, Weinert P, Wilkinson SM, Uter W (2017) Occupational skin diseases: actual state analysis of patient management pathways in 28 European countries. JEADV 31 (Suppl 4):12–30Google Scholar
  13. O’Malley M, Thun M, Morrison J, Mathias CG, Halperin WE (1988) Surveillance of occupational skin disease using the supplementary data system. Am J Ind Med 13:291–299CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Pesonen M, Jolanki R, Filon FL, Wilkinson M, Kręcisz B, Kieć-Świerczyńska M, Bauer A, Mahler V, John SM, Schnuch A, Uter W, ESSCA network (2015) Patch test results of the European baseline series among patients with occupational contact dermatitis across Europe-analyses of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergy network, 2002–2010. Contact Dermatitis 72:154–163CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Riihimki H, Karjalainen A, Kurppa K et al (2002) Occupational diseases in Finland in 2002. New cases of occupational diseases reported to the Finnish register of occupational diseases. Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  16. Schnuch A, Butz M (1993) Kosten berufsbedingter Hauterkrankungen für die Berufsgenossenschaften. Derm Beruf Umwelt 41:10–19Google Scholar
  17. Turner S, Carder M, van Tongeren M, McNamee R, Lines S, Hussey L, Bolton A, Beck MH, Wilkinson M, Agius R (2007) The incidence of occupational skin disease as reported to The Health and Occupation Reporting (THOR) network between 2002 and 2005. Br J Dermatol 157:713–722CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Uter W, Schnuch A, Geier J, Pfahlberg A, Gefeller O, IVDK study group. Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (2001) Association between occupation and contact allergy to the fragrance mix: a multifactorial analysis of national surveillance data. Occup Environ Med 58:392–398CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Uter W, Rühl R, Pfahlberg A, Geier J, Schnuch A, Gefeller O (2004a) Contact allergy in construction workers: results of a multifactorial analysis. Ann Occup Hyg 48:21–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Uter W, Schnuch A, Gefeller O, ESCD working group: European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (2004b) Guidelines for the descriptive presentation and statistical analysis of contact allergy data. Contact Dermatitis 51:47–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Uter W, Geier J, Lessmann H, Schnuch A (2006) Is contact allergy to glyceryl monothioglycolate still a problem in Germany? Contact Dermatitis 55:54–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Uter W, Hegewald J, Pfahlberg A, Lessmann H, Schnuch A, Gefeller O (2010a) Contact allergy to thiurams: multifactorial analysis of clinical surveillance data collected by the IVDK network. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 83:675–681CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Uter W, Schnuch A, Giménez-Arnau A, Orton D, Statham B (2010b) Databases and networks – the benefit for research and quality assurance in patch testing. In: Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin J-P (eds) Contact dermatitis, 5th edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 1053–1063Google Scholar
  24. Uter W, Schnuch A, Wilkinson M, Dugonik A, Dugonik B, Ganslandt T (2016) Registries in clinical epidemiology: the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA). Methods Inf Med 55:193–199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Uter W, Goossens A, Gonçalo M, Johansen JD, on behalf of the EECDRG (2017) Guidelines for the presentation of contact allergy case reports. Contact Dermatitis 76:107–113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Warburton KL, Urwin R, Carder M, Turner S, Agius R, Mark Wilkinson S (2015) UK rates of occupational skin disease attributed to rubber accelerators, 1996-2012. Contact Dermatitis 72:305–311CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and EpidemiologyUniversity of Erlangen/NürnbergErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations