Rustemeyer T, Frosch P J
Department of Dermatology, Städtische Kliniken Dortmund, Germany.
Contact Dermatitis. 1996 Feb;34(2):125-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1996.tb02144.x.
In Germany, occupational skin disease (OSD) in dental technicians (DT) has been steadily rising in recent years and causing considerable costs for medical care and rehabilitation. Our objective in this study was to: (i) examine affected workers; (ii) perform patch tests to identify causative agents; (iii) develop strategies of prevention. 7 dental laboratories were inspected as to materials used, working habits, safety regulations, etc. A computer data base was developed for products (trade name, active ingredient, additives, etc.). A questionnaire regarding development of OSD was sent out to 1132 dental technicians (45 questions). 55 DT with suspected OSD were examined and patch tested with the standard series, an extensive series of methacrylates, and own materials. Working conditions, and knowledge of potential hazards, varied greatly in the laboratories visited. The safety data sheets of working materials were of little use and required supplementation by the computer data base, which provided rapid access to allergological information (e.g., type of acrylate, concentration). In the questionnaire (173 answers), 36% reported skin lesions attributed to work and 1/3 suspected plastic materials as their primary cause. Among the 55 DT examined, allergic contact dermatitis was diagnosed in 63.6% and irritant contact dermatitis in 23.6%. Most of the allergens identified (74%) were found in plastic materials (methyl methacrylate (MMA), 9 patients (16%); 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA), 18 patients (33%); ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA), 15 patients (27%)). In 16 patients, multiple sensitizations to various methacrylates were found. The fingertips were primarily involved in allergic contact dermatitis (93%), whereas in irritant contact dermatitis, the dorsa of the fingers (especially of the dominant hand) were affected (80%). 9 patients also showed lesions on the face, neck and forearms. The main irritant factors included wet work, contact with plaster, mechanical friction and thermal changes. Based on experience with DT, various preventive measures have been tried and found to be effective (reduction of skin contact, 4H Gloves, etc.). In conclusion, better knowledge of OSD in dental laboratories (in physicians, DT and their employers) would lead to a reduced rate of new cases.
在德国,近年来牙科技师的职业性皮肤病(OSD)呈稳步上升趋势,给医疗护理和康复带来了相当大的成本。我们这项研究的目的是:(i)检查受影响的工人;(ii)进行斑贴试验以确定致病因素;(iii)制定预防策略。对7个牙科实验室进行了检查,内容包括所使用的材料、工作习惯、安全规定等。建立了一个关于产品(商品名、活性成分、添加剂等)的计算机数据库。向1132名牙科技师发放了一份关于职业性皮肤病发病情况的问卷(45个问题)。对55名疑似患有职业性皮肤病的牙科技师进行了检查,并用标准系列、一系列广泛的甲基丙烯酸酯类以及他们自己的材料进行了斑贴试验。在所走访的实验室中,工作条件以及对潜在危害的了解程度差异很大。工作材料的安全数据表用处不大,需要由计算机数据库进行补充,该数据库能快速提供过敏学信息(如丙烯酸酯类型、浓度)。在问卷(173份回复)中,36%的人报告有归因于工作的皮肤病变,三分之一的人怀疑塑料材料是其主要原因。在所检查的55名牙科技师中,诊断出过敏性接触性皮炎的占63.6%,刺激性接触性皮炎的占23.6%。所确定的大多数过敏原(74%)存在于塑料材料中(甲基丙烯酸甲酯(MMA),9例患者(16%);甲基丙烯酸2-羟乙酯(2-HEMA),18例患者(33%);乙二醇二甲基丙烯酸酯(EGDMA),15例患者(27%))。在16例患者中,发现对各种甲基丙烯酸酯类有多重致敏。过敏性接触性皮炎主要累及指尖(93%),而在刺激性接触性皮炎中,手指背部(尤其是优势手)受到影响(80%)。9例患者的面部、颈部和前臂也有病变。主要的刺激因素包括湿作业、接触石膏、机械摩擦和热变化。根据对牙科技师的经验,已经尝试了各种预防措施并发现是有效的(减少皮肤接触、4H手套等)。总之,牙科实验室(医生、牙科技师及其雇主)对职业性皮肤病有更好的了解将导致新病例发生率降低。