PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 8654076

Patch testing with preservatives at St John's from 1982 to 1993.

Abstract

We have reviewed our patch test results for preservative allergy from 1982 to 1993. 8 preservatives were included: formaldehyde, 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol (Bronopol(TM)), quaternium-15 (Dowicil 200TM), imidazolidinyl urea (Germall 115TM), diazolidinyl urea (Germall IITM), parabens, 5-chloro-2methyl-isothiazolin-3-one (Kathon CG(TM)) and 1,2-dibromo-2,4-dicyanobutane (one of the constituents of Euxyl K 400TM). Whereas the allergy rate to formaldehyde is quite stable, there is a slight increase in the imidazolidinyl urea allergy rate. Quaternium-15's rate is decreasing and 5-chloro-2-methyl-isothiazolin-3-one plus 2-methyl-isothiazolin-3-one's rate, after a rapid rise, seems to have stabilized. Although very important constituents of cosmetics, preservatives not only induce allergies on the face but also on the hands, and, as expected, the allergy rate in men and women generally differs. Among the 5 formaldehyde-releasers, there are some favoured simultaneous reactions: quaternium-15 and formaldehyde, and diazolidinyl urea and imidazolidinyl urea. Concomitant reactions between 1-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol and formaldehyde are not common, and those between 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol and diazolidinyl urea, and formaldehyde are not very common. This supports the hypothesis that allergic reactions to the Germalls are directed toward the initial molecule rather than to formaldehyde.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M C Jacobs, I R White, R J Rycroft, N Taub. 1995. Patch testing with preservatives at St John's from 1982 to 1993.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1995.tb00476.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Dermatologist and family practitioner practice patterns for occupational contact dermatitis.

Medical practitioners have a role in the recognition of occupational contact dermatitis. The longer the duration of symptoms before diagnosis, the poorer the outcome. Our objective was to understand practice patterns, barriers and needs for early diagnosis of occupational contact dermatitis. A survey to obtain information on practice patterns was developed based on the literature and interviews with dermatologists and family practitioners. The survey was sent to all dermatologists and a random sample of 600 family practitioners in Ontario. Fifty-seven per cent of dermatologists and 9% of family practitioners report seeing more than 20 patients per year with occupational contact dermatitis. The majority of practitioners report taking a workplace exposure history. Barriers to taking a workplace exposure history include time constraints and lack of knowledge. Reasons for referral to specialists include a lack of expertise, testing facilities and knowledge about workers' compensation, time constraints and inadequate reimbursement, whereas lack of access to specialists is a barrier for referral. Although most practitioners identify a need for further education, a low volume of patients and time constraints are key barriers to continuing education. Opportunities are identified to improve educational initiatives and health services delivery for occupational contact dermatitis, tailored to each practitioner group.

Dermatitis, Allergic Contact↗