Allergic contact dermatitis has been established as the most frequent cause of eyelid dermatitis, but it is often misdiagnosed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of patients with eyelid dermatitis who were referred for patch testing. The patients were divided into three subgroups in this retrospective study: patients with only eyelid involvement, patients with involvement of eyelids and other areas, and patients without eyelid involvement. Data was collected on diagnoses, medical history, personal care products and make-up use, occupational dermatitis, and positive allergens. An independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, and chi-squared test were used to analyze the data. A total of 427 patients who referred for patch tests were included in the study. Of these, 139 patients had eyelid dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) was the most common diagnosis in all three groups referred for patch tests. Use of shaving cream and hair conditioner was significantly higher in patients with only eyelid involvement and nickel sulfate was the most common allergen among them. Patch testing is the gold standard tool in the evaluation of eyelid contact dermatitis, and it is a necessity in the treatment of eyelid dermatitis, for the accurate identification of responsible allergens.

Eczematous diseases (contact dermatitis, atopic dermatitis, hand eczema) are among the most frequent findings in dermatological clinical practice. A large body of evidence exists on structural and functional skin barrier damage in eczematous diseases, and on the importance of interventions aimed to repair such damage. While there is substantial agreement on pharmacological treatment, more sparse data are available on role, indications and usefulness of topical non-pharmacological treatments, despite significant research and progress in the composition and technology of emollients, cleansers and barrier creams significantly changed and expanded the functional activities of these products. This often leads to inadequate prescription and/or use, which increase individual and social costs of the disease and make the products useless or, in some cases, even counterproductive. This consensus document, discussed and compiled in a series of meetings by a group of Italian dermatologists experienced in the field of eczematous diseases, summarizes epidemiology and clinical features of the nosological entities of the "eczema family", illustrates the chemical/biochemical structure of emollients, cleansers and barrier creams, and aims to help physicians to exploit the full potential of available products, by providing a detailed but practical guide on characteristics, indications and correct use of non-pharmacological treatments currently available for eczematous diseases.

Occupational allergic diseases (OAD) such as occupational contact dermatitis (OCD), occupational asthma (OA), and occupational rhinitis (OR) are the most prevalent occupational diseases in industrialized countries. The purpose of this review is to provide an update about the main occupational metal and solvent exposures related to allergy and airway diseases and to discuss newly defined causative agents and industries in this field.

Currently for over 400 causative agents for OA and OCD, several hundreds of agents for OR have been identified. Although many studies have reported an overall decline in OAD related to known agents after implementation of efficient and effective workplace preventive measures, the constant development of new products continuously introduces to the market potential unknown respiratory hazards. Workplace allergens are often high molecular weight (HMW) agents that are > 10 kDa molecular weight and capable of eliciting IgE sensitization. Sensitizing low molecular weight (LMW) agents are often reactive chemicals. Metals and solvents are two large causative agent groups related to OADs that mainly behave as LMW (< 10 kDa) sensitizers and/or irritants. Avoidance of causative exposures through control strategies is the primary prevention approach for OADs. These strategies must be applied and covered for all known and newly defined causative agents. This review aims to summarize current status of known occupational metal and solvent exposures related to allergy and airway diseases and to discuss newly defined causative agents and industries in this field.

Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is a common diagnosis in patients with occupational contact dermatitis (OCD). Studies are lacking on the usefulness of material safety data sheets (MSDSs) in making the diagnosis of ICD.

To characterize irritant exposures leading to the diagnosis of occupational ICD (OICD), and to evaluate the occurrence of concomitant exposures to contact allergens.

We included 316 patients with suspected occupational hand dermatitis, referred to the Department of Dermato-Allergology, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Denmark during January 2010-August 2011, in a programme consisting of a clinical examination, exposure assessment, and extensive patch/prick testing.

OCD was diagnosed in 228 patients. Of these patients, 118 were diagnosed with OICD. The main irritant exposures identified were wet work (n = 64), gloves (n = 45), mechanical traumas (n = 19), and oils (n = 15). Exposure to specific irritant chemicals was found in 9 patients, and was identified from MSDSs/ingredients labelling in 8 of these patients. Review of MSDSs and ingredients labelling showed that 41 patients were exposed to 41 moderate to potent contact allergens, and 18 patients were exposed to 25 weak workplace contact allergens.

In the present study, the systematic exposure assessment did not reveal any new irritants. MSDSs have a limited role in the investigation of ICD.

The diagnosis of combined allergic and irritant contact dermatitis is an accepted subdiagnosis for hand dermatitis, and it is often considered in a patient with contact dermatitis, a positive and relevant patch test result, and wet work exposure. We therefore hypothesize that it is arbitrary for wet work exposure to be taken into consideration in a patient with newly diagnosed relevant contact allergy. Furthermore, an overestimation of the diagnosis will probably occur if the criteria for wet work exposure are applied correctly, as many occupations have an element of wet work.

To find the statistically expected number of combined allergic and irritant contact dermatitis cases in 1000 patients, and to evaluate the diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis.

One thousand consecutive patients with occupational contact dermatitis from a hospital unit in Denmark were assessed.

The expected number of cases with the diagnosis of combined allergic and irritant contact dermatitis was 0.33%, as compared with the observed number of 6.4%. Females occupied in wet occupations were often diagnosed with combined allergic and irritant contact dermatitis (p < 0.005).

The diagnosis of combined allergic and irritant contact dermatitis should be used critically to avoid misclassification, and possible criteria for the diagnosis are proposed.

Classification of hand eczema has traditionally been based both on aetiology and clinical appearance. For 20% of cases, the aetiology is unknown.

To suggest a classification based on well-defined aetiology as well as on predefined clinical patterns and on the dynamics of hand eczema.

Literature studies and discussions among members of the Danish Contact Dermatitis Group.

Criteria are given for the aetiological diagnoses of allergic contact dermatitis of the hands, irritant contact dermatitis of the hands, protein contact dermatitis of the hands, atopic hand eczema and aetiologically unclassifiable hand eczema. Six different clinical patterns are described and illustrated. Suggestions for general treatment principles are given.

Operational guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of hand eczema are described.