Natural Rubber Latex Hypersensitivity: Incidence and Prevalence of Type I Allergy in the Dental Professional

Hamann, Carsten R.; Turjanmaa, Kristiina; Rietschel, Robert L.; Siew, Chakwan; Owensby, David; Gruninger, Stephen E.; Sullivan, Kim

doi:10.14219/jada.archive.1998.0021

Cited by 63 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A frequently emphasized problem is allergy to latex gloves, which is reported in various studies all over the world as the most common cause of dermatitis in dental personnel 16,17 . However, studies have been conducted that point out that only 4% to 6% of dental personnel are truly positive to latex 18 . A signifi cant Polish study on skin disease related to occupation, performed by Kurpiewska et al, investigated the prevalence of self reported skin symptoms on hands and forearms amongst various professionals (medical workers, hairdressers, cosmeticians, food industry workers, cleaners, metal workers and textile industry workers).…”

Section: Prevalence Of Occupational Dermatosesmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Section: Prevalence Of Occupational Dermatosesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational Contact Dermatitis Amongst Dentists and Dental Technicians

Lugović-Mihić

Ferček

Duvančić

et al. 2016

ACC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…17 Our results have shown that 79% of adverse reactions relating to glove use show improvement, when using a variety of techniques and / or treatments. Nevertheless, there is still a need for further investigation to confirm and determine the true extent of any Type I or Type IV reactions in order to try and to avoid potentially life-or career-threatening allergic reactions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…9 Hamann et al, carried out a study on latex hypersensitivity in dental professionals in the USA. 17 They reported a frequency of dental professionals with a suspected Type I allergy to NRL as 24.8% (478 out of 1931 subjects). In addition they reported a frequency of confirmed Type I allergic reactions to NRL as 6.2% (105 out of 1,701 subjects).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Allergic and irritant adverse reactions are difficult to diagnose without appropriate tests carried out by specialists, 17 and due to the nature of Type I reactions being potentially life-threatening it is essential that confirmed diagnoses are sought rather than self-treatment. 17 Our results have shown that 79% of adverse reactions relating to glove use show improvement, when using a variety of techniques and / or treatments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

“…1 Furthermore, our study showed that Lebanese dentists used latex gloves for 14.51 ±8.82 years, and rubber latex gloves can cause delayed allergies (type IV), with a reaction usually occurring 24-96 hours after exposure, as well as immediate (type I) allergic reactions. [11][12] Hand eczema caused by acrylates and methacrylates is considered to be one of the more common occupational diseases, affecting mainly dental care personel (dentists, dental assistants and prosthetics technicians). 13 Acrylic monomers are considered to be potent sensitizers and acrylic resins have the potential to induce cytotoxic, irritant and/or contact allergic reactions, whereas this capacity is absent or significantly reduced after polymerization, which is incomplete or at best 83%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%