DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4529.IntJResDermatol20183155

A study of profile of contact dermatitis in housewives with reference to vegetables, soaps and detergents

Vidushi Malhotra, Alka Dogra, Sunil Kumar Gupta, Sandeep Kaur

Abstract


Background: Contact dermatitis in housewives is a common dermatological problem as almost all housewives have to handle vegetables, fruits, soaps and detergents. The purpose of this project was to study etiologic profile of contact dermatitis occurring in housewives.

Methods: One hundred housewives, clinically diagnosed as having contact dermatitis, were randomly selected for the study. Each patient was then subjected to patch testing using the Indian standard battery and certain indigenously prepared antigens i.e. vegetables, soaps and detergents. The first reading was taken 60 minutes with second reading at 96 hours. Reading equal to or more than 1+ was considered to be a positive test.

Results: Majority patients were in the age group of 20-30 years. Morphological diagnosis was wear and tear dermatitis in 43%, discoid eczema (19%), fingertip eczema (16%), hyperkeratotic (15%) and pompholyx (7%). Nickel sulphate was found to be the commonest allergen (19%) followed by para-phenylenediamine (8%), fragnance mix (7%), Balsam of Peru (6%), parthenium (6%) and cobalt (5%). Amongst vegetables, the commonest culprit was garlic. Allergic reaction to detergents was positive in 13% patients. Forty-four percent of the cases tested positive to the suspected allergen whereas 31% patients tested positive for allergens not initially suspected of causing contact dermatitis in them.

Conclusions: Thus patch testing is an important tool in establishing the cause of allergic contact dermatitis of the hands in housewives in whom the hand eczema is multifactorial. This enables the correct etiological diagnosis and proper management of housewives with hand dermatitis.

 


Keywords


Contact dermatitis, Hand eczema, Patch test

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adams RM. Diagnostic Patch Testing. In: Occupational Skin Disease. New York: Gruna and Stratton; 1983: 136.

Domonkos AN. Contact Dermatitis, Drug Eruptions, Atopic Dermatitis and Eczema. In: Andrews GC, editor. Diseases of the Skin. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1971: 84-139.

Elston DM, Ahmed DDF, Watsky KL. Hand Dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 2002;47:291-9.

Meding B, Swanbeck G. Epidemiology of different types of hand eczema in an industrial city. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh). 1989;69:227-33.

Suman M, Reddy BS. Pattern of contact sensitivity in Indian patients with hand eczema. J Dermatol. 2003;30:649-54.

Kishore NB, Belliappa AD, Shetty NJ, Sukumar D, Ravi S. Hand eczema-clinical patterns and role of patch testing. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2005;71:207.

Bajaj AK. Contact dermatitis hands. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1983;49:195-9.

Calnan CD, Bandmann HJ, Cronin E. Hand dermatitis in housewives. Br J Dermatol. 1970;82:543-8.

Kumar P, Rao SG, Kuruvilla M. Dermatoses of the hand-an observation. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1999;65:124-5.

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

Cronin E. Clinical patterns of hand eczema in women. Contact Dermatitis. 1985;13:153-61.

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

EI-Rod MOG, AbdulazizAl-Sheikh O. Is the European standard series suitable for patch testing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia? Contact Dermatitis. 1995;33:310-4.

Castiglioni G, Carosso A, Manzon S. Result of routine patch testing of 834 patients in Turin. Contact Dermatitis. 1999;27:182-5.

Hogan DJ, Hill M, Lane PR. Result of routine patch testing of 542 patients in Saskatoon, Canada. Contact Dermatitis. 1988;19:120-4.

Pasricha JS. Contact dermatitis in India, General Features. The offsetters, New Delhi. 1988;1-20.

Dogra A, Minocha YC, Sood VK, Dewan SP. Contact dermatitis due to cosmetics and their ingredients. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1994;60:72-5.

Dogra A, Minocha YC, Kaur S. Adverse reactions to cosmetics. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2003;69:165-7.

Narendra G, Srinivas CR. Patch testing with Indian standard series. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2002;68:281-2.

Lodi A, Mancini LL, Ambonati M, Coassini A, Ravanelli G, Crosti C. Epidemiology of occupational contact dermatitis in a North Italian population. Eur J Dermatol. 2000;10:128-32.

Bajaj AK, Saraswat A, Mukhija G, Rastogi S, Yadav S. Patch testing experience with 1000 patients. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2007;73:313-8.

Davoudi M, Firoozabadi MR, Gorouhi F, Zarchi AK, Kashani MN, Dowlati Y, et al. Patch testing in Iranian patients: A ten-year experience. Indian J Dermatol. 2006;51:250-4.

Hammershoy O. Standard patch test results in 3225 consecutive Danish patients from 1973 to 1977. Contact Dermatitis. 1980;6:263-8.

Laxmisha C, Kumar S, Nath AK, Thappa DM. Patch testing in hand eczema at a tertiary care center. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2008;74:498-9.

Shenoi DS, Srinivas CR, Balachandran C. Results of patch testing with a standard series of allergens at Manipal. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1994;60:133-5.

Dogra A, Dua A. Cosmetic dermatitis. Indian J Dermatol. 2005;50:191-5.

Singh G, Singh KK. Contact dermatitis of hands. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1886;52:152-4.

Sinha SM, Pasricha JS, Sharma RC, Kandhari KC. Vegetables responsible for the contact dermatitis of the hands. Arch Dermatol. 1977;113:776-9.

Jappe U, Bonnekoh B, Hausen BM, Gollnick H. Garlic related dermatoses: case report and review of literature. Am J Contact Dermat. 1999;10:37-9.

Austoria AJ, Lakshmi C, Srinivas CR, Anand CV, Mathew AC. Irritancy potential of 17 detergents used commonly by the Indian household. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2010;76:249-53.

Pasricha JS, Kanwar AJ. Substances causing contact dermatitis. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 1978;44:264-8.