Browse > Article

An Epidemiologic Study on Patch Test Positivities for Patients with Allergic Contact Dermatitis  

Kim, Beom-Joon (Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University)
Kwon, Hyok-Bu (Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, Dongguk University)
Lee, Joon-Ho (Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, Dongguk University)
Lee, Seung-Ho (Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, Dongguk University)
Lee, Ai-Young (Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, Dongguk University)
Publication Information
Korean journal of dermatology / v.46, no.10, 2008 , pp. 1362-1368 More about this Journal
Abstract
Background: The common allergens for patients with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) have changed with the passage of time. Ammoniated mercury was the most common allergen in the 1980s, but it has been replaced by nickel sulphate. Objective: We wanted to delineate the recent alterations of common allergens of Korean ACD patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical recordings of the patients who were diagnosed with ACD and we performed patch tests on these patients from July 2005 to May 2008. A total of 676 patients were enrolled in this study and the medical records included the patients’ age and gender, the site of ACD, the clinical pictures and the results of a Korean standard series of patch tests. Results: The male to female ratio was 1.62 and the mean age of onset was 41.2±16.5 years. The most common ages of the ACD patients were the forties for males and the thirties for females. The most prevalent sites for ACD were the face, scalp and hands in males, while those for females were the face, hands and arms in order of frequency, respectively. The most common allergens were nickel sulfate for females and mercury ammonium chloride for males. Conclusion: For ACD, the relative proportion of male patients has recently been markedly enlarged. This phenomenon might be related to the increased use of men’s cosmetic products, and the market for these products had tremendously expanded during the last decade. (Korean J Dermatol 2008;46(10):1362∼1368)
Keywords
Contact dermatitis; Epidemiology; Patch test
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
Times Cited By SCOPUS : 4
연도 인용수 순위
1 Nethercott J, Holness D, Adams R. Patch testing with a routine screening tray in North America, 1985-1989. II: Gender and response. Am J Contact Dermatitis 1991;2:198-201   DOI
2 Perryman JH, Fowler JF Jr. A patch test study to evaluate the allergenicity of a metallic jewelry alloy in patients allergic to cobalt. Cutis 2006;77:77-80
3 Moon KC, Eun HC, Kim HO, Kim KJ, Hong CG, Lee CH, et al. An epidemiologic study of contact dermatitis in Korea. Korean J Dermatol 1995;33:445-452
4 MacIntyre CR, Leask J. Immunization myths and realities: responding to arguments against immunization. J Paediatr Child Health 2003;39:487-491   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Osawa J, Kitamura K, Ikezawa Z, Nakajima H. A probable role for vaccines containing thimerosal in thimerosal hypersensitivity. Contact Dermatitis 1991;24:178-182   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Freiman A, Al-Layali A, Sasseveille D. Patch testing with thimerosal in a Canadian center: an 11-year experience. Am J Contact Dermat 2003;14:138-143
7 Ruff CA, Belsito DV. The impact of various patient factors on contact allergy to nickel, cobalt, and chromate. J Am Acad Dermatol 2006;55:32-39   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Kim BJ, Li K, Woo SM, Cho WI, Cho SY, Kim MN, et al. Clinical observation of cellular phone dermatitis in Korea. Korean J Dermatol 2006;44:35-39
9 Holness DL, Nethercott JR, Adams RM, Belsito D, Deleo V, Emmett EA, et al. Concomitant positive patch test results with standard screening tray in North America 1985 -1989. Contact Dermatitis 1995;32:289-292   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Kim DW, Chung JH, Lee AY, Kim JA, Eun HC. A study of mercury sensitivity in military personnel without contact dermatitis. Korean J Dermtol 1992;30:347-353
11 Eun HC, Koh CJ, Kook HI, Kim DH, Kim CW, Kim HJ, et al. An epidemiological study of contact dermatitis. Korean J Dermatol 1986;24:335-339