Clinical Profile and Patch Test Results among Hand Eczema Patients at a Tertiary Care Institute


Affiliations

  • MVP Nashik, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra, 422013, India
  • Dr. Vasantrao Pawar Medical College Hospital & Research Centre, Department of Dermatology, Nashik, Maharashtra, 422003, India

Abstract

Background: Hand eczema is one of the most common dermatological disorders caused by various exogenous and endogenous factors. The condition that is frequently multifactorial, usually disabling or distressing to the sufferer, and often difficult to treat. Aims and Objectives: 1. To study the clinical profile among hand eczema patients. 2. To study the patch test results among hand eczema patients. Methodology: The present study was observational study, non-interventional, non-comparative conducted during October 2013 to December 2015 on 100 patients in OPD of Department of Dermatology at Dr. Vasantrao Pawar Medical College and Research Centre. A diagnosis was made by nomenclature proposed by Epstein. Patients were patch tested with the Indian Standard Battery approved by the Contact and Occupational Dermatoses Forum of India (CODFI). Results: 45 (45%) of patients gave a positive history to aggravation by a contact with detergents and soaps, and 25 (25%) patients for cement. 70 (70%) had bilateral involvement. Out of 100 patients patch tested, 70 patients (70%) gave positive patch test results, 30 patients (30%) were negative for patch test, 49 patients (49%) were sensitive to a single antigen and 21patients (21%) were sensitive to two antigens. Potassium dichromate was the most common sensitizer in male compared to female at the ratio of 2.2:1. Nickel sulfate was the most common sensitizer in females at the ratio of 0.07:1. Conclusion: Hyperkeratotic eczema and patchy vesiculosquamous type of hand dermatitis were the common patterns, but clinical patterns and specific allergen association was inconclusive.

Keywords

Allergens, Hand Eczema, Patch Test.

Full Text:

References

Wilkinson DS. Introduction, definition and classification.2nd ed. Hand Eczema. Menne T, Maibach HI, editors. New York: CRC Press; 2000. p. 1–13.

Jones JB. Eczema, lichenification, prurigo and erythroderma.8th ed. Rook’s Textbook of dermatology. Burns T, Breathnaeh S, Cox N, Griffiths C, editors. London: Blackwell.2010. p. 1.

Bajaj AK. Contact dermatitis hands. Ind J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1983; 49(5):195–9. PMid:28176694.

Epstein E. Hand dermatitis: Practical management and current concepts. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984; 10:395–423.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0190-9622(84)80086-9.

Warshaw EM, Ahmed RI, Belsito DV. Contact dermatology of the hands; cross sectional analyses of North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data 1994- 2004. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007; 57:301-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2007.04.016 PMid:17553593.

Agrup G. Hand eczema. Acta Derma Venereol. 1969; 49:41– 7.

Peltonen L. Nickel sensitivity in the general population.Contact Dermatitis 1979; 5:27–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1979.tb05531.x PMid:421456.

Kishore NB, Belliappa AD, Shetty NJ, Sukumar D, Rauis.Hand eczema – clinical patterns and role of patch testing.Ind J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2005; 71:207– 8. https:// doi.org/10.4103/0378-6323.16244.

Goh CL. An epidemiological comparison between hand eczema and non-hand eczema. Br J Dermatol. 1988; 118:797– 801. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1988.tb02598.x PMid:3401415.

Skoet R, Olsen J, Mathiesen B. A survey of occupational hand eczema in Denmark. Contact Dermatitis. 2004; 51:159–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2004.00423.x PMid:15500664.

Kumar P, Rao GS, Kuruvilla M. Dermatoses of the hand- An observation. Ind J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1999; 124-5.PMid:20921631.

Diepgen TL. Management of chronic hand eczema.Contact Dermatitis. 2007; 57:203–10.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536. 2007.01179.x PMid:17868211 13.

Sharma VK, Kaur S. Contact dermatitis of hands in Chandigarh. Ind J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1987; 53:103– 7.

Beck MW, Wilkinson SM. Contact dermatitis: Allergic. 8th ed. Rook’s Textbook of Dermatology. Burns T, Breathnaeh S, Cox N, Griffiths C, editors. London: Blackwell; 2010. p.1–106.

Hald M, Anger T, Blands J. Clinical severity and prognosis of hand eczema. Br J Dermatol. 2009; 160:1229–36. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09139.xPMid:19416249.

Lerback A, Kyvik KO, Ravn H. Clinical characteristics and consequences of hand eczema– An 8 year follow-up study of a population-based twin cohart. Contact Dermatitis. 2008; 56:210–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01305.x PMid:18353028.

Skudli KC, Dulon M, Pohrt U. Osnabrueck hand eczema severity inde – A study of the interobserver reliability of a scoring system assessing skin diseases of the hands. Contact Dermatitis. 2006; 55:42–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.01051873.2006.00871.x PMid:16842554.

Minocha YC, Dogra A, Sood VK. Contact sensitivity in palmar hyperkeratotic dermatitis. Ind J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1993; 59:60–3.

Huda MM, Paul UK. Patch testing in contact dermatitis of hands and feet. Ind J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1996; 62:361-2. PMid:20948125.

Jungbauer FHW, Lensen GJ, Groothoff JW, Coenroads PJ. Exposure of the hands to wet work in nurses. Contact Dermatitis. 2004; 50:225-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.01051873.2004.0314.x PMid:15186378.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.