Occupational contact dermatitis in a gender perspective: North East Italian data 1996-2016 OCD in a gender perspective in North Italy

Main Article Content

Marcella Mauro
Massimo Bovenzi
Francesca Larese Filon

Keywords

occupational contact dermatitis, patch test, sex.

Abstract

Background. Occupational contact dermatitis (OCD) ranks high among occupational diseases in Europe, little is known as regard OCD and jobs in a gender perspective. Objectives. To evaluate sex  prevalence of OCD according to occupational sectors and agents involved. 27381 patients (1996–2016) with suspected irritant/allergic contact dermatitis (ICD-ACD) were evaluated in North-Eastern Italy. Each patient underwent: a standardized questionnaire, a dermatologist/occupational physician evaluation and patch test. Results. Females were younger at diagnosis (35.2 ± 11.6 years vs 37.7 ± 12.6 in men, p< 0.001) and had a lower ICD prevalence (OR 0.58, C.I. 95% 0.51 - 0.66, p < 0.001). Job categories most involved differed between sexes, with highest rank for healthcare professionals in females and machinery mechanics and filters for males. In females ACD percentage was higher in all job categories. Conclusions: OCD characteristics differ between sexes, according to intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Use of personal care products, housekeeping products and outdoor work activities may account for different sensitization profiles.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 5 | PDF Downloads 6

References

1. Diepgen TL, Coenraads PJ The epidemiology of occupational contact dermatitis. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1999; 72(8):496–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004200050407
2. Deutsche Gesetzliche Unfallversicherung e.V. (DGUV). DGUV statistics 2013. Figures and long-term trends. Available at: http://www.dguv.de/medien/inhalt/zahlen/documents/schueler/dguvstatistiken2013e.pdf Accessed 20.11.2019
3. McCormick K, Abdel-Rahman MS. The role of testosterone in trichloroethylene penetration in vitro. Environ Res 1991;54(1):82-92.
4. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 03/12/2007. Available at: https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ef_publication/field_ef_document/ef0698en.pdf Accessed 10.11.2019
5. Epting LK, Overman WH. Sex-sensitive tasks in men and women: a search for performance fluctuations across the menstrual cycle. Behav Neurosci 1998;112(6):1304-17.
6. Schondorf R, Low PA. Gender related differences in the cardiovascular responses to upright tilt in normal subjects. Clin Auton Res 1992;2(3):183-7.
7. Eartly, H., Grad, B., and LeBlond, C. P. The antagonistic relationship between testosterone and thyroxine in maintaining the epidermis of the male rat. Endocrinology 1951; 49:677-686.
8. Cotterill JA, Cunliffe WJ, Williamson B, Bulusu L. Age and sex variation in skin surface lipid composition and sebum excretion rate. Br J Dermatol 1972;87(4):333-40.
9. Whitton JT, Everall JD. The thickness of the epidermis. Br J Dermatol 1973;89(5):467-76.
10. Shuster S, Black MM, McVitie E. The influence of age and sex on skin thickness, skin collagen and density. Br J Dermatol 1975;93(6):639-43.
11. Bronaugh R L, Stewart R F and Congdon E. R.Differences in permeability of rat skin related to sex and body site. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1983; 34, 127-135.
12. Wilhelm KP, Cua AB, Maibach HI. Skin aging. Effect on transepidermal water loss, stratum corneum hydration, skin surface pH, and casual sebum content. Arch Dermatol 1991;127(12):1806-9.
13. Ya-Xian Z, Suetake T, Tagami H. Number of cell layers of the stratum corneum in normal skin - relationship to the anatomical location on the body, age, sex and physical parameters. Arch Dermatol Res 1999;291(10):555-9.
14. Ehlers C, Ivens UI, Møller ML, et al. Females have lower skin surface pH than men. A study on the surface of gender, forearm site variation, right/left difference and time of the day on the skin surface pH. Skin Res Technol 2001;7(2):90-4.
15. Sandby-Møller J, Poulsen T, Wulf HC. Epidermal thickness at different body sites: relationship to age, gender, pigmentation, blood content, skin type and smoking habits. Acta Derm Venereol 2003; 83(6): 410-3.
16. Jacobi U, Gautier J, Sterry W, Lademann J. Gender-related differences in the physiology of the stratum corneum. Dermatology 2005;211(4):312-7.
17. Giacomoni PU, Mammone T, Teri M. Gender-linked differences in human skin. J Dermatol Sci 2009;55(3):144-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdermsci.2009.06.001. Epub 2009 Jul 1.
18. Man MQ, Xin SJ, Song SP et al. Variation of skin surface pH, sebum content and stratum corneum hydration with age and gender in a large Chinese population. Skin Pharmacol Physiol 2009;22(4):190-9. doi: 10.1159/000231524. Epub 2009 Jul 31.
19. Firooz A, Sadr B, Babakoohi S et al. Variation of biophysical parameters of the skin with age, gender, and body region. Scientific World Journal 2012:386936. doi: 10.1100/2012/386936.
20. Mizukoshi K, Akamatsu H. The investigation of the skin characteristics of males focusing on gender differences, skin perception, and skin care habits. Skin Res Technol. 2013;19(2):91-9. doi: 10.1111/srt.12012
21. Dąbrowska AK; Spano F, Derler S et al. The relationship between skin function, barrier properties, and body-dependent factors. Skin Res Technol 2018;24(2):165-174. doi: 10.1111/srt.12424
22. Zhen YX, Suetake T, Tagami H. Number of cell layers of the stratum corneum in normal skin—relationship to the anatomical locationon the body, age, sex and physical parameters. Arch Dermatol Res 1999; 291:555‐559.
23. Rui F, Bovenzi M, Prodi A et al. Nickel, cobalt and chromate sensitization and occupation. Contact Dermatitis 2010: 62: 225–231.
24. Johansen JD, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T et al. European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing - recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis 2015;73(4):195-221. doi: 10.1111/cod.12432.
25. International Standard Classification of Occupations, available at: https://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/stat/isco/isco88/index.htm. Accessed 12.01.2019
26. Schwensen JF, Friis UF, Menné T, Johansen JD. One thousand cases of severe occupational contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 2013;68:259-68. doi: 10.1111/cod.12045.
27. Bensefa-Colas L, Telle-Lamberton M, Paris C et al. French National Network of Occupational Disease Vigilance Prevention (RNV3P), Momas I. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis and major allergens in France: temporal trends for the period 2001-2010. Br J Dermatol 2014;171:1375-85. doi: 10.1111/bjd.13133.
28. Pesonen M, Jolanki R, Larese Filon F et al. 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 2015;72:154-63. doi: 10.1111/cod.12333.
29. Ibler KS, Jemec GB, Flyvholm MA et al. Hand eczema: prevalence and risk factors of hand eczema in a population of 2274 healthcare workers. Contact Dermatitis 2012;67(4):200-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02105.
30. Prodi A, Rui F, Belloni Fortina A et al. Sensitization to Formaldehyde in Northeastern Italy, 1996 to 2012. Dermatitis 2015; 26:177-183.
31. Kadivar S, Belsito DV. Occupational Dermatitis in Health Care Workers Evaluated for Suspected Allergic Contact Dermatitis. Dermatitis 2015; 26:177-183.
32. Schwensen JF, Johansen JD, Veien NK et al. Occupational Contact Dermatitis in Hairdressers: An Analysis of Patch Test Data From the Danish Contact Dermatitis Group, 2002-2011. Contact Dermatitis 2014; 70: 233-237.
33. Emerek R. Gender segregation in the labour market: roots, implications and policy responses in Denmark: Report to European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities, Unit G. 1. Publications Office (2008) https://vbn.aau.dk/en/publications/gender-segregation-in-the-labour-market-roots-implications-and-po. Accessed 28.01.2020.
34. Francesca B. The Pros and Cons of Occupational Gender Segregation in Europe. Source: Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques, Occupational Gender Segregation: Public Policies and Economic Forces 2002; 28Suppl: S65-S84. Published by: University of Toronto Press on behalf of Canadian Public Policy, Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3552344 Accessed 10.01.2019