Publication

Occupational dermatitis to facial personal protective equipment in health care workers: A systematic review

Downloadable Content

Persistent URL
Last modified
  • 05/14/2025
Type of Material
Authors
    Jiade Yu, Harvard Medical SchoolJennifer K. Chen, Stanford UniversityChristen M. Mowad, Geisinger Medical CenterMargo Reeder, University of WisconsinSara Hylwa, Hennepin HealthcareSarah Chisolm, Emory UniversityCory A. Dunnick, University of ColoradoAri M. Goldminz, Harvard Medical SchoolSharon E. Jacob, Loma Linda UniversityPeggy A. Wu, University of California DavisJonathan Zippin, Weill Cornell Medical CollegeAmber Reck Atwater, Duke University
Language
  • English
Date
  • 2021-01-11
Publisher
  • MOSBY-ELSEVIER
Publication Version
Copyright Statement
  • © 2020 Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.
Final Published Version (URL)
Title of Journal or Parent Work
Volume
  • 84
Issue
  • 2
Start Page
  • 486
End Page
  • 494
Grant/Funding Information
  • None.
Abstract
  • Background: Prolonged wear of facial protective equipment can lead to occupational dermatoses. Objective: To identify important causes of occupational dermatoses from facial protective equipment. Methods: A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed using PubMed and Embase databases. Articles were included if they reported occupational dermatoses caused by surgical/procedure masks or N95 respirators, or both. Results: We identified 344 articles, and 16 were suitable for inclusion in this review. Selected articles focused on facial occupational dermatoses in health care workers. Allergic contact dermatitis to the elastic straps, glue, and formaldehyde released from the mask fabric was reported. Irritant contact dermatitis was common on the cheeks and nasal bridge due to pressure and friction. Irritant dermatitis was associated with personal history of atopic dermatitis and prolonged mask wear (>6 hours). Acneiform eruption was reported due to prolonged wear and occlusion. Contact urticaria was rare. Limitations: Only publications listed in PubMed or Embase were included. Most publications were case reports and retrospective studies. Conclusion: This systematic review from members of the American Contact Dermatitis Society highlights cases of occupational dermatitis to facial protective equipment, including potential offending allergens. This work may help in the diagnosis and treatment of health care workers with facial occupational dermatitis.
Author Notes
  • Amber Reck Atwater, MD, Duke Contact Dermatitis and Patch Testing Center, 5324 McFarland Dr, #210, Durham, NC 27707.
Keywords
Research Categories
  • Health Sciences, Health Care Management
  • Health Sciences, Medicine and Surgery

Tools

Relations

In Collection:

Items