{"title":"牙科专业人员中乳胶过敏的流行率--系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"A P Vaiude, A Jawdekar, L N Mistry","doi":"10.1922/CDH_00068Vaiude06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite concerns such as allergic dermatitis and bans recommended by health authorities, latex gloves are used by dental professionals in many countries. There are published reports of the prevalence of latex allergy in health professionals including dental professionals; however, no systematic review and meta-analysis is available.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the prevalence of latex allergy in dental professionals.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Two researchers independently searched articles using appropriate keyword combinations in three search engines; PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for observational studies on latex allergy in dental professionals reported in English or where complete translations in English were included. Percentage prevalence of latex allergy was the variable of interest. The risk of bias was assessed using the Hoy et al. (2012) tool and publication bias using a funnel plot.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 435 possible sources, a total of 14 studies were included in the review and meta-analysis. The prevalence of latex allergy, based on 6302 participants was 10.37% (95% CI: 7.31 to 13.88). Heterogeneity (I2) was high (94.13%); hence, REM was used. There was moderate risk of bias across studies and minimal publication bias. GRADE analysis indicated that the evidence was uncertain.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence of latex allergy in dental professionals is about 10.37%. Evidence is of low quality due to high heterogeneity.</p>","PeriodicalId":10647,"journal":{"name":"Community dental health","volume":" ","pages":"202-207"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevalence of latex allergy in dental professionals - A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"A P Vaiude, A Jawdekar, L N Mistry\",\"doi\":\"10.1922/CDH_00068Vaiude06\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite concerns such as allergic dermatitis and bans recommended by health authorities, latex gloves are used by dental professionals in many countries. There are published reports of the prevalence of latex allergy in health professionals including dental professionals; however, no systematic review and meta-analysis is available.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the prevalence of latex allergy in dental professionals.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Two researchers independently searched articles using appropriate keyword combinations in three search engines; PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for observational studies on latex allergy in dental professionals reported in English or where complete translations in English were included. Percentage prevalence of latex allergy was the variable of interest. The risk of bias was assessed using the Hoy et al. (2012) tool and publication bias using a funnel plot.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 435 possible sources, a total of 14 studies were included in the review and meta-analysis. The prevalence of latex allergy, based on 6302 participants was 10.37% (95% CI: 7.31 to 13.88). Heterogeneity (I2) was high (94.13%); hence, REM was used. There was moderate risk of bias across studies and minimal publication bias. GRADE analysis indicated that the evidence was uncertain.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence of latex allergy in dental professionals is about 10.37%. Evidence is of low quality due to high heterogeneity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10647,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Community dental health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"202-207\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Community dental health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1922/CDH_00068Vaiude06\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community dental health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/CDH_00068Vaiude06","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prevalence of latex allergy in dental professionals - A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Despite concerns such as allergic dermatitis and bans recommended by health authorities, latex gloves are used by dental professionals in many countries. There are published reports of the prevalence of latex allergy in health professionals including dental professionals; however, no systematic review and meta-analysis is available.
Objectives: To determine the prevalence of latex allergy in dental professionals.
Method: Two researchers independently searched articles using appropriate keyword combinations in three search engines; PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for observational studies on latex allergy in dental professionals reported in English or where complete translations in English were included. Percentage prevalence of latex allergy was the variable of interest. The risk of bias was assessed using the Hoy et al. (2012) tool and publication bias using a funnel plot.
Results: From 435 possible sources, a total of 14 studies were included in the review and meta-analysis. The prevalence of latex allergy, based on 6302 participants was 10.37% (95% CI: 7.31 to 13.88). Heterogeneity (I2) was high (94.13%); hence, REM was used. There was moderate risk of bias across studies and minimal publication bias. GRADE analysis indicated that the evidence was uncertain.
Conclusions: The prevalence of latex allergy in dental professionals is about 10.37%. Evidence is of low quality due to high heterogeneity.
期刊介绍：
The journal is concerned with dental public health and related subjects. Dental public health is the science and the art of preventing oral disease, promoting oral health, and improving the quality of life through the organised efforts of society.
The discipline covers a wide range and includes such topics as:
-oral epidemiology-
oral health services research-
preventive dentistry - especially in relation to communities-
oral health education and promotion-
clinical research - with particular emphasis on the care of special groups-
behavioural sciences related to dentistry-
decision theory-
quality of life-
risk analysis-
ethics and oral health economics-
quality assessment.
The journal publishes scientific articles on the relevant fields, review articles, discussion papers, news items, and editorials. It is of interest to dentists working in dental public health and to other professionals concerned with disease prevention, health service planning, and health promotion throughout the world. In the case of epidemiology of oral diseases the Journal prioritises national studies unless local studies have major methodological innovations or information of particular interest.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
