T Agner1, M A Flyvholm, T Menné. 1. Department of Dermatology, Gentofte University Hospital, and the Department of Allergy and Irritation, National Institute of Occupational Health, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Formaldehyde is a commonly used preservative in cosmetic products, cleaning agents and industrial products, and sensitization to formaldehyde frequently occurs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of extensive information and exposure assessment of formaldehyde on the prognosis of eczema. METHODS: The present study was designed as a clinical follow-up study of formaldehyde-sensitive patients. 105 patients diagnosed as formaldehyde allergic in the period January 1 1990 to December 31 1994 were thoroughly informed about their allergy, and exposure assessment was performed as a formaldehyde analysis on the patients' products. RESULTS: At follow-up 1 to 5 years later, 57 patients accepted the invitation to attend the outpatient clinic for an interview and a skin examination by a dermatologist, and were also at this time asked to bring products to which they were currently exposed for formaldehyde analysis. Evaluated by reported number of eczema eruptions and from objective skin examination patients had generally improved from their first visit to the department. At follow-up, 38 of 49 patients bringing products for analysis were still exposed to formaldehyde, as assessed by formaldehyde analysis on their products. There was a trend that severe eczema was found more often in patients still exposed to formaldehyde, but this finding was not statistically significant. Thirty-seven patients reported that they "paid attention to their allergy" when buying and using cosmetics or consumer products. CONCLUSION: Patients who paid attention to their allergy had statistically significantly fewer eruptions than those who did not.
BACKGROUND:Formaldehyde is a commonly used preservative in cosmetic products, cleaning agents and industrial products, and sensitization to formaldehyde frequently occurs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of extensive information and exposure assessment of formaldehyde on the prognosis of eczema. METHODS: The present study was designed as a clinical follow-up study of formaldehyde-sensitive patients. 105 patients diagnosed as formaldehyde allergic in the period January 1 1990 to December 31 1994 were thoroughly informed about their allergy, and exposure assessment was performed as a formaldehyde analysis on the patients' products. RESULTS: At follow-up 1 to 5 years later, 57 patients accepted the invitation to attend the outpatient clinic for an interview and a skin examination by a dermatologist, and were also at this time asked to bring products to which they were currently exposed for formaldehyde analysis. Evaluated by reported number of eczema eruptions and from objective skin examination patients had generally improved from their first visit to the department. At follow-up, 38 of 49 patients bringing products for analysis were still exposed to formaldehyde, as assessed by formaldehyde analysis on their products. There was a trend that severe eczema was found more often in patients still exposed to formaldehyde, but this finding was not statistically significant. Thirty-seven patients reported that they "paid attention to their allergy" when buying and using cosmetics or consumer products. CONCLUSION:Patients who paid attention to their allergy had statistically significantly fewer eruptions than those who did not.