Prevalence of Type I Allergy to Latex and Type IV Allergy to Rubber Additives in Turkish Healthcare Workers

dc.contributor.authorAksoy, Hasan
dc.contributor.authorAkdeniz, Necmettin
dc.contributor.authorKarakurt, Fatma
dc.date.accessioned2025-05-10T19:32:14Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.departmentİstanbul Medeniyet Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Glove-induced dermatoses are frequently seen among healthcare workers (HCWs) and are often mistakenly defined as latex allergy. Objectives: To determine the prevalences of (i) the symptoms of immediate type hypersensitivity reactions, (ii) the symptoms of hand eczema, (iii) latex sensitization detected using skin prick test (SPT), and (iv) contact hypersensitivity to rubber additives or glove pieces detected using patch test, in Turkish HCWs. Methods: Ninety-eight HCWs were included in the study. All subjects completed a questionnaire. All participants were skin prick tested for latex, and foods previously identified as concomitant allergens in latex-sensitive individuals; patch tested for 7 rubber additives, 3 additional haptens, and glove pieces. Results: The mean age was 32.1 (+/- 9.4) years, and 71 (72.4%) participants were nurses. Eighty-four (85.7%) subjects had a history of mucocutaneous symptoms of immediate-type hypersensitivity occurring within the first 24 hours after latex glove contact, while 9 (9.2%) subjects demonstrated SPT positivity for latex. Eighty (81.6%) subjects had a history of glove-induced hand eczema symptoms, while patch test positivity for the rubber additives or glove pieces was in 17.3%. Conclusions: About one-tenth of those with a history of glove-induced type I hypersensitivity symptoms had true latex allergy, and one-quarter of those with a history of glove-related hand eczema symptoms had contact hypersensitivity to glove products. Therefore, rote avoidance of latex use is generally ineffective in the management of glove-related skin complaints. Individual measures should focus on reducing the use of soaps and disinfectants, and promoting the use of moisturizers, rather than glove choice.
dc.description.sponsorshipTurkish Society of Dermatology
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was funded by Turkish Society of Dermatology.
dc.identifier.doi10.5826/dpc.1303a187
dc.identifier.issn2160-9381
dc.identifier.issue3
dc.identifier.pmid37557117
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/A
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5826/dpc.1303a187
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14730/8199
dc.identifier.volume13
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001074574200022
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherMattioli 1885
dc.relation.ispartofDermatology Practical & Conceptual
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WOS_20250302
dc.subjectglove
dc.subjecthealthcare workers
dc.subjectlatex
dc.subjectrubber additives
dc.titlePrevalence of Type I Allergy to Latex and Type IV Allergy to Rubber Additives in Turkish Healthcare Workers
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket

Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Yükleniyor...
Küçük Resim
İsim:
8199.pdf
Boyut:
312.08 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format