PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Gerhard Richter

Publications and source records attributed to Gerhard Richter.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

[Four years of quality assurance of dermatologic procedures: report from the ABD clearing institution].

BACKGROUND: Expert dermatologic evaluation is the most relevant tool for secondary prevention in occupational dermatology in Germany. If there is a possibility of a work-related skin disorder in an employee, dermatologists may conduct the relevant diagnostic procedures (e.g. patch-and prick-tests, serology) at the expenses of the public employers' liability insurance fund (UVT). Most dermatologists make careful use of this unparalleled privilege, which is also an obligation. However, recently, with an increasing number of dermatologist's reports submitted, there have been occasional complaints by the UVT concerning overly extensive testing. In 1999 the Task Force on Occupational and Environmental Dermatology (ABD) of the German Dermatological Society established a clearing procedure. Two experienced occupational dermatologists will--separately--give their expert opinion on dermatologist's reports which have been forwarded anonymously by the UVT for expert review. RESULTS: Thus far, from May 1999 to May 2003 155 dermatologist's reports have been submitted to the clearing procedure. The complaints were in > 95% of cases considered justified by the experts. Their criticism was primarily directed towards excessive testing procedures and failure to provide sufficient clinical information. CONCLUSIONS: The UVT does not undertake such extensive preventive efforts for any other occupational disease. Therefore, quality management of the dermatologist's procedure--conducted by dermatologists and providing transparency--is essential to maintain and develop this effective tool of secondary prevention for the benefit of workers and employers.

Germany↗

Patch testing with components of water-based metalworking fluids.

Water-based metalworking fluids (MWFs) may cause both irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. Several well-known MWF allergens are available for patch testing, but considering the wide variety of possible components used in MWF, our diagnostic arsenal covers only a small part of potential allergens. We therefore selected 13 frequently used MWF components that might be sensitizers and had not yet been tested routinely. In 5 centres, 233 dermatitis patients with present or past occupational exposure to MWF were patch tested with this and other panels. Only 7 patients showed positive reactions to the study panel. Allergic reactions to the emulsifier diglycolamine [syn. 2-(2-aminoethoxy) ethanol] were seen in 5 patients, and 1 patient each reacted positively to 2-amino-2-ethyl-1,3-propanediol (AEPD) and methyldiethanolamine (MDEA). Clinical relevance of the reactions to diglycolamine was unequivocally proven by its presence in the MWF from the patients' workplace in 3 cases. Diglycolamine seems to be an important MWF allergen, independently from monoethanolamine and diethanolamine. A test concentration of 1% petrolatum (pet.) appears to be appropriate. The importance of AEPD and MDEA as MWF allergens still remains to be established. The lack of positive test reactions to the other MWF components tested may be due to their low-sensitizing potential or too low a patch test concentration being used.

Adult↗