Occupational dermatoses in hospital cleaning women
- 1 October 1983
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Contact Dermatitis
- Vol. 9 (5), 343-351
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1983.tb04426.x
Abstract
In an investigation of 541 members of a hospital cleaning department, a prevalence rate of occupational skin diseases of 15.3% was found. During their hospital employment, 39.1% had it skin disease. Higher prevalence in the younger age groups can be explained by the selection of those with skin diseases for work away from the cleaning department. A large number developed their disease shortly after employment began. This was an indication that the observed prevalent conditions were irritant diseases. The distribution by diagnosis confirms this conclusion in as much as 75% of the occupational skin diseases were irritant dermatitis, 21% allergic contact dermatitis, and 4% monilia of the finger webs. The causes of allergic contact dermatitis were found to be formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde and chloramine in addition to nickel and rubber. Among the causes of irritant dermatitis were detergents, alkaline substances, acids and sodium perborate as well as hypochlorite, and hypobromite combinations. In order to reduce occupational skin diseases among cleaning personnel, it is necessary to extend both local and more general prophylactic measures.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Glutaraldehyde occupational dermatitisContact Dermatitis, 1983
- Interspecies comparisons of skin irritancyToxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 1975
- Hypersensitivity and Photosensitivity to ChlorhexidineDermatology, 1971
- HAND DERMATITIS IN HOUSEWIVESBritish Journal of Dermatology, 1970
- Über den quantitativen Nachweis von Nickel in synthetischen WaschmittelnDermatology, 1967
- A Synthetic Detergent as a Provocative Agent in Patch Tests1Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 1956
- I. Mitteilungen – Communications. Beiträge zum WaschmittelekzemDermatology, 1955
- A Study of Eczematous Sensitivity to Formaldehyde1Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 1952