4.1 Article

Occupational skin disease in Victoria, Australia

Journal

AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
Volume 57, Issue 2, Pages 108-114

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/ajd.12375

Keywords

allergic; contact dermatitis; irritant; occupational; patch testing

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectivesTo describe the characteristics of patients with occupational skin disease (OSD) in a tertiary referral clinic in Victoria, Australia. MethodsA retrospective review was conducted of records from patients seen at the Occupational Dermatology Clinic in Melbourne, Australia between 1 January 1993 and 31 December 2010. ResultsOf the 2894 people assessed in the clinic during the 18-year period, 44% were women and 56% were men. In all, 2177 (75%) were diagnosed with occupational skin disease (OSD). Of the patients with a work-related skin condition, 45% (n=979) were considered to be atopic. The most common diagnosis in those with OSD was irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) (44%), followed by allergic contact dermatitis (33%) and endogenous eczema (11%). Women were significantly more likely to have soaps and detergents (P<0.001) and water/wet work (P<0.001) as causes of their ICD than men. Men were significantly more likely to have oils and coolants (P<0.001) and solvent exposures (P<0.001) as causes of their ICD. Occupational groups with the highest incidence of OSD were the hair and beauty professions (70 per 100000), followed by machine and plant operators (38 per 100000) and health-care workers (21 per 100000). ConclusionWe confirm the importance of occupational contact dermatitis as the most common cause of OSD, with ICD being the most common diagnosis. There are differences in the causes of ICD between our group of male and female workers. For the first time in Australia, rates of OSD in certain industries have been calculated.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available