Latex sensitivity in dental students and staff: A cross-sectional study☆, ☆☆, ★, ★★

Tarlo, Susan M.; Sussman, Gordon; Holness, D. Linn

doi:10.1016/s0091-6749(97)70058-7

Cited by 156 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A previous American study found a 15% prevalence of adverse reactions to latex gloves in a major dental facility 70) . True latex allergy had been medically diagnosed in only 2% of dentists in a previous study of dentists, which is lower than other investigations where between 4% and 10% of dental personnel and senior dental students tested positive to latex allergy 66,67,71) . Even so, formal testing of all dentists for latex allergy, if it were conducted, would probably yield much higher prevalence rates of latex allergy.…”

Section: Dermatitis and Respiratory Hypersensitivitycontrasting

confidence: 62%

Occupational Health Problems in Modern Dentistry: A Review

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite numerous technical advances in recent years, many occupational health problems still persist in modern dentistry. These include percutaneous exposure incidents (PEI); exposure to infectious diseases (including bioaerosols), radiation, dental materials, and noise; musculoskeletal disorders; dermatitis and respiratory disorders; eye injuries; and psychological problems. PEI remain a particular concern, as there is an almost constant risk of exposure to serious infectious agents. Strategies to minimise PEI and their consequences should continue to be employed, including sound infection control practices, continuing education and hepatitis B immunisation. As part of any infection control protocols, dentists should continue to utilise personal protective measures and appropriate sterilisation or other high-level disinfection techniques. Aside from biological hazards, dentists continue to suffer a high prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), especially of the back, neck and shoulders. To fully understand the nature of these problems, further studies are needed to identify causative factors and other correlates of MSD. Continuing education and investigation of appropriate interventions to help reduce the prevalence of MSD and contact dermatitis are also needed. For these reasons, it is therefore important that dentists remain constantly informed regarding up-to-date measures on how to deal with newer technologies and dental materials.

show abstract

Section: Dermatitis and Respiratory Hypersensitivitycontrasting

confidence: 62%

Occupational Health Problems in Modern Dentistry: A Review

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Th ese data diff er from one study to another. It became apparent that 4% to 10% of dental personnel and senior dental students were positive to latex allergy, whereas earlier dental studies showed real allergy to latex to be medically diagnosed in only 2% of dentists (which was less than in other studies) 23 .…”

Section: Reactions To Latexmentioning

confidence: 71%

Occupational Contact Dermatitis Amongst Dentists and Dental Technicians

Lugović-Mihić

Ferček

Duvančić

et al. 2016

ACC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY -Since the working medical personnel including dentists and dental technicians mainly use their hands, it is understandable that the most common occupational disease amongst medical personnel is contact dermatitis (CD) (80%-90% of cases). Development of occupational CD is caused by contact of the skin with various substances in occupational environment. Occupational etiologic factors for dental personnel are foremost reactions to gloves containing latex, followed by various dental materials (e.g., metals, acrylates), detergents, lubricants, solvents, chemicals, etc. Since occupational CD is relatively common in dental personnel, its timely recognition, treatment and taking preventive measures is needed. Achieving skin protection at exposed workplaces is of special importance, as well as implementing necessary measures consequently and suffi ciently, which is sometimes diffi cult to achieve. Various studies have shown the benefi t of applying preventive measures, such as numerous protocols for reducing and managing latex sensitivity and other forms of CD in dentistry. Active involvement of physicians within the health care system, primarily dermatologists, occupational medicine specialists and general medicine doctors is needed for establishing an accurate medical diagnosis and confi rmation of occupational skin disease.

show abstract

“…8 Tarlo et al 14 found that an increasing number (a 10-fold increase) of dental students became sensitised to latex proteins between their first and fourth year of training. Similarly the more exposure one has to the chemicals in latex gloves the higher the chances of becoming sensitised to the allergens and thus suffering an adverse reaction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adverse reactions to protective gloves used in the dental profession: experience of the UK Adverse Reaction Reporting Project

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Adverse Reaction Reporting Project (ARRP) was set up to measure the extent and severity of adverse reactions to dental materials in the UK. Further analysis into the use of protective gloves has been carried out to establish the degree to which gloves are having a deleterious effect on the dental profession. In addition the survey aimed to establish the techniques used to manage adverse reactions and their effectiveness. In a 23-month period, 369 reports were received concerning adverse reactions to protective gloves used in dental practices. Reporters were contacted for further information, and a 92% response rate was achieved. The 330 reports analysed showed dentists to be the largest group to report adverse reactions, whilst dental technicians reported the fewest. The referral rate for staff and patients was similar with a third of adverse reactions being referred (n=110) to a specialist for diagnosis. A confirmed diagnosis was received in 65% of referred cases (n=72), but the symptoms reported suggested a larger degree of Type I reactions occurring than diagnosed. The use of non-powdered gloves appeared to be favoured over powdered gloves in 42% of glove changes, and nitrile gloves were used as an alternative to latex in 39% of changes. In conclusion, the results from this survey showed that wearing gloves in dental practices in the UK caused a range of adverse reactions. In 79% (n=330) of cases reported and analysed, these reactions were readily resolved or improved by selfmedication, prescribed medication and / or changing to a different type of protective glove.

show abstract

Latex sensitivity in dental students and staff: A cross-sectional study☆, ☆☆, ★, ★★

Cited by 156 publications

References 22 publications

Occupational Health Problems in Modern Dentistry: A Review

Occupational Health Problems in Modern Dentistry: A Review

Occupational Contact Dermatitis Amongst Dentists and Dental Technicians

Adverse reactions to protective gloves used in the dental profession: experience of the UK Adverse Reaction Reporting Project

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About