Documents 9 results

Background Reports on the studies conducted in Western Europe and North America revealed that from 2.8 to 16.9% of the health care personnel were allergic to latex. No respective data are available from Eastern European countries. Methods A postal questionnaire inquiring about the history of latex-induced allergic reactions was distributed among 3,750 nurses. The participation rate was 77.3%. To verify the results of the survey, in randomly selected nurses, skin prick tests with latex and tropical fruit allergens, evaluation of total IgE, and specific anti-latex IgE, skin and nasal provocation with latex were performed. Results Allergic symptoms in the workplace were reported by 1,016 subjects (35%); out of this group 847 (29.2%) persons associated the symptoms with latex exposure. The group of cases with self-reported latex allergy revealed a significantly increased frequency of history of atopy, allergy to -lactam antibiotics and tropical fruits. Allergy to latex was confirmed in 33.3% of randomly selected nurses with a positive history of occupational allergy. It was found that 18.6% of nurses working at hospital wards were allergic to latex. The 95%CI was estimated to be 13.5-23.6%. Conclusions Latex allergy is an important health problem among nurses in Poland. Atopy, allergy to >-lactam antibiotics and tropical fruits, are the risk factors for latex allergy .

Background Natural rubber latex (NRL) has become an important occupational health concern in recent years, particularly among health care workers. It has been suggested in some reports that the prevalence of latex sensitization among occupationally exposed groups is not different from that in the general population. Methods The findings of prevalence studies conducted among occupationally-exposed and general population groups were reviewed to determine whether there is evidence to support this suggestion. Results Numerous surveys of HCWs have demonstrated that the prevalence of sensitization to latex ranged in most studies from 5 to 12%; sensitization of HCWs may produce clinical effects including urticaria, rhinoconjunctivitis, occupational asthma, and potentially life-threatening anaphylactic shock. More than a decade ago, data from Finland indicated that the prevalence of latex allergy in the general population was less than 1%. Recent reports from Finland have confirmed this, with observations that 0.7-1.1% of large series of patients were NRL-allergic, while among 804 unselected patients, the prevalence of latex skin prick test (SPT) positivity was 0.12%. In contrast, other studies have suggested that from 4 to 6.4% of individuals tested were positive for serum latex-specific IgE antibodies. However, the specificity of these assays has been reported to be low. In three recent studies based on SPTs, published in 1997, the prevalence of positive reactions to latex was about 1% or less. The prevalence was 0.7% (95% CI 0.3-1.4) among 758 apprentices in Quebec, Canada; and 1.1% among more than 3,000 children tested in Finland (1.0% confirmed on latex use test). There were no first- and second-year dental students with positive latex SPTs in Ontario, Canada. Conclusions These recent investigations provide further evidence consistent with earlier studies based on skin testing that the prevalence of latex sensitization in occupationally-unexposed groups is quite low (<1%). The marked differences in the findings based on serological assays may relate to the nonspecificity of these assays and deserve further investigation.

A study of respiratory function and immunological status of 17 female workers employed in a small latex (9006046) glove manufacturing facility in Zagreb, Croatia was reported. The workers prepared latex solution from the original rubber material collected from rubber trees. Thirteen participants were nonsmokers and four were light smokers. The controls were 17 females employed as food packagers in a confectionery factory who were not exposed to latex and were matched to the cohort by age and smoking status. The subjects completed a respiratory symptom questionnaire. Spirometric testing was performed. Skin prick testing was performed using aqueous extracts of latex and latex gloves and common aeroallergens. Industrial hygiene monitoring for dusts was performed. The latex glove workers reported a significantly higher prevalence of chronic respiratory symptoms such as dyspnea, chronic cough and hoarseness than the controls. One of the latex workers, a nonsmoker, had symptoms of occupational asthma. A high prevalence of overshift (acute) symptoms such as eye irritation, nasal dryness, throat irritation, cough, dyspnea, and headache was also reported by the latex workers. Forced vital capacity (FVC), one second forced expiratory volume, and flow rates at 50 and 75% of FVC (FEF75) were significantly lower in the latex workers than in the controls. The most pronounced decrease was seen in FEF75. Only one latex worker reacted to skin testing with the latex extracts. She also reported symptoms compatible with occupational asthma. None of the subjects reacted to the common aeroallergens. Talc (14807966) was the major dust to which the latex workers were exposed. The total and respirable talc dust concentrations averaged 7.7 and 1.9mg/m3, which exceeded the Croatian standards of 1.5 and 0.5mg/m3, respectively. The authors conclude that, besides occupational asthma, exposures associated with latex glove manufacturing are associated with frequent nonspecific respiratory symptoms.

The relationship between sensitization to natural rubber latex (NRL) and work disability was examined among health care workers. A questionnaire was completed by 32 female health care workers diagnosed with NRL allergy and 51 age, sex and occupation matched health care workers without NRL allergy. The Work Ability Index (WAI), based on the physical and mental demands of work and the worker's health status and resources, was used to determine the working capability of the workers. The usefulness of symptoms in screening for NRL allergy was also examined. The median WAI was lower among the latex allergic workers than among the nonsensitized workers. Among latex allergic workers, the mean WAI increased following the exclusion of allergic eczema from the calculations. In the control group, the mean WAI remained unchanged following the exclusion of allergic eczema from the calculations. The median difference between sensitized and nonsensitized workers was 1.0 point greater among workers performing both physically and mentally demanding work than among workers performing mentally demanding work only. Work ability was categorized as poor, moderate, and good in 9, 56, and 34% of the sensitized workers and 2, 45, and 53% of the nonsensitized workers, respectively. Of the sensitized subjects, 44% experienced dry skin, 97% experienced itchy hands, and 56% experienced hand eczema. Of the controls, 25%, 22%, and 8% reported dry skin, itchy hands, and hand eczema, respectively. Symptoms such as watery or itchy eyes, rhinorrhea, and lip edema were reported almost exclusively by sensitized workers. The reporting of at least one skin condition with one mucosal symptom served as a sensitive and specific indicator of NRL allergy. The authors conclude that latex allergy is clearly associated with decreased work ability in health care workers. A self administered questionnaire may be useful for quick latex allergy screening.

"Les dermatoses professionnelles au caoutchouc sont essentiellement des dermatites de contact d'irritation et/ou allergiques et des urticaires de contact. Les équipements de protection individuelle (EPI) sont principalement impliqués, par exemple les gants chez les personnels de santé ou les gants, bottes et chaussures de sécurité chez les salariés du Bâtiment et travaux publics (BTP). La plupart des EPI en caoutchouc sont irritants, surtout en cas de port prolongé.
Les principaux allergènes responsables de dermatite de contact allergique sont les additifs du caoutchouc (accélérateurs de vulcanisation et anti-oxydants).
Le latex est de loin la principale cause d'allergie immédiate IgE dépendante au caoutchouc."

"We sought to describe risk factors for latex glove allergy symptoms among health care workers by combining data from an active clinical surveillance program and a comprehensive occupational health surveillance system. A total of 4,584 employers completed a latex allergy questionnaire. Six percent (n = 276) of subjects reported symptoms consistent with latex allergy. Years of latex glove use was a significant risk factor for latex allergy symptoms even after controlling for the effects of atopy, gender, age, race, fruit, and other allergies. Nurses, medical or lab technicians, physician's assistants, other clinical professionals, and housekeepers had the highest prevalence of latex glove allergy symptoms. Forty subjects (0.87%) who were confirmed as having latex sensitization. Sensitizsation may have been underestimated due to use of specific IgE antibody, less sensitive than skin-prick testing, and tiered design leading to laboratory assessment on a subset of the cohort. This surveillance program identified risk factors for latex allergy symptoms. Our findings provide a basis for tailoring future prevention strategies."