This review provides a summary of key findings from 18 systematic reviews on atopic eczema, published or indexed between January 2009 and 24 August 2010. There was no good evidence on the possible benefit of organic food consumption and eczema. Maternal intake of fish or fish oil may be associated with a reduced risk of eczema in offspring, although further studies are needed. There is some evidence that partially hydrolysed infant formulas rather than standard formulas may be associated with a reduced risk of eczema in infants, but there are shortcomings in the existing evidence. An inverse relationship has been found between gliomas/acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and allergic disease/eczema, but there appears to be no association between multiple sclerosis and eczema. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder does appear to be associated with eczema, but there is no evidence of a causal link. The risk of eczema seems to be increased in urban compared with rural areas. Some new evidence has suggested superiority of 1% pimecrolimus over potent and mild corticosteroids at 6 months but not 12 months, and there is some evidence for superiority of 0.03% and 0.1% tacrolimus over 1% pimecrolimus. An updated Cochrane Review still found no evidence of a benefit from any form of antistaphylococcal treatment in managing clinically infected or uninfected eczema. The evidence base is poor for bath emollients, occlusive treatments (e.g., wet and dry wraps) and woven silk clothing in treating eczema. In general, the methods used in most systematic reviews of eczema need to be reported more clearly, especially with regard to a more vigorous quality assessment of included studies. Included studies are frequently heterogeneous, proxy reporting is common, and appropriate disease definitions are often lacking. Better adherence to existing guidance on trial reporting and prospective registration of clinical trials may help improve the quality of studies.
RESUMEN Fundamento. Con objeto de analizar la incidencia y características de la patología respiratoria ocupacional en Navarra, se implantó en enero de 2002 el Registro de Enfermedades Respiratorias de Origen Laboral. Métodos. Los casos notificados por los médicos colaboradores durante los años 2002, 2003 y 2004, se introdujeron en una base de datos diseñada para su análisis posterior, que constaba de distintas variables: sexo, edad, tabaco, servicio y médico declarante, diagnóstico, profesión y agente causal. Resultados. Se notificaron 125 casos. 97 varones (77,6%) y 28 mujeres (22,4%). La media de edad fue 55,4 años. Ochenta y ocho pacientes no fumaban (70,4%) y 37 eran fumadores (29,6%). Neumología declaró 84 casos (67,2%) y Alergología 41 (32,8%). Los diagnósticos fueron: 50 casos de asma bronquial (40%), 31 de enfermedad pleural benigna (24,8%), 8 alveolitis alérgica extrínseca (6,4%), 8 mesotelioma (6,4%), 7 cáncer broncopulmonar (5,6%), 5 inhalaciones agudas (4%), 3 asbestosis (2,4%), 2 rinitis (1,6%), 1 RADS (0,8%) y 1 EPOC (0,8%). Las profesiones más declaradas: 13 pintura/barnizado (10,4%), 12 hilado de ovillos de amianto (9,6%) y 8 panadería/pastelería (6,4%). Como agentes causales principales: 49 casos de asbesto (39,2%), 15 isocianatos (12%) y 8 sílice (6,4%). Conclusiones. La patología más frecuente fue el asma bronquial, seguida de la enfermedad pleural benigna. La profesión más notificada era pintura/barnizado y en segundo lugar hilado de ovillos. El asbesto fue la primera sustancia implicada seguida de los isocianatos. La mayoría de pacientes eran varones y no fumadores. El Servicio de Neumología del Hospital Virgen del Camino notificó el mayor número de casos. El análisis de contraste de proporciones mostró cierta tendencia a la significación en rinitis, asma bronquial y asbestosis. Palabras clave. Enfermedades respiratorias ocupacionales. Registro. Asma ocupacional. Enfermedad pleural no maligna. Asbesto.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.