{"title":"北印度养蜂人职业性皮炎的发病率、模式、接触致敏因素及其对生活质量的影响。","authors":"Misbah Qayoom, Iffat Hassan, Shazia Jeelani","doi":"10.1111/cod.14724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Beekeepers face specific occupational health risks due to exposure to bee products and chemicals. Propolis is a notable cause of contact hypersensitivity in beekeepers. Its chemical composition varies by region, complicating allergy investigations. While propolis allergies are documented in Western populations, no studies exist in India.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>To assess the prevalence and patterns of dermatitis among beekeepers, identify contact sensitisers and evaluate its impact on quality-of-life (QoL).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>An 18-month community-based cross-sectional study was conducted involving 340 beekeepers from the Kashmir Valley in North India. Data collection included personal interviews, dermatological examinations and patch testing using self-made antigens of propolis, beeswax, royal jelly and standardised Baseline Indian Standard Series. The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was used to measure the impact of dermatitis on QoL.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Dermatitis prevalence among beekeepers was 17.1%, with the majority presenting with hand eczema. Onset or worsening of dermatitis was reported by 77.6% after working in apiaries. Significant associations were found with duration of beekeeping (<i>p</i> < 0.05) and a history of atopy (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Patch testing revealed 27.5% of beekeepers with positive reactions, primarily to propolis (10% in pet). The mean DLQI score was 3.5, indicating a generally small impact on QoL.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Dermatitis was a common occupational condition among beekeepers, strongly associated with the duration of beekeeping and a history of atopy, though its overall impact on QoL was limited. Propolis emerged as a primary sensitiser in the study population.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 3","pages":"217-223"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevalence, pattern, contact sensitisers and impact on quality-of-life of occupational dermatitis among beekeepers in North India\",\"authors\":\"Misbah Qayoom, Iffat Hassan, Shazia Jeelani\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cod.14724\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Beekeepers face specific occupational health risks due to exposure to bee products and chemicals. Propolis is a notable cause of contact hypersensitivity in beekeepers. Its chemical composition varies by region, complicating allergy investigations. While propolis allergies are documented in Western populations, no studies exist in India.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>To assess the prevalence and patterns of dermatitis among beekeepers, identify contact sensitisers and evaluate its impact on quality-of-life (QoL).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>An 18-month community-based cross-sectional study was conducted involving 340 beekeepers from the Kashmir Valley in North India. Data collection included personal interviews, dermatological examinations and patch testing using self-made antigens of propolis, beeswax, royal jelly and standardised Baseline Indian Standard Series. The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was used to measure the impact of dermatitis on QoL.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Dermatitis prevalence among beekeepers was 17.1%, with the majority presenting with hand eczema. Onset or worsening of dermatitis was reported by 77.6% after working in apiaries. Significant associations were found with duration of beekeeping (<i>p</i> < 0.05) and a history of atopy (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Patch testing revealed 27.5% of beekeepers with positive reactions, primarily to propolis (10% in pet). The mean DLQI score was 3.5, indicating a generally small impact on QoL.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Dermatitis was a common occupational condition among beekeepers, strongly associated with the duration of beekeeping and a history of atopy, though its overall impact on QoL was limited. Propolis emerged as a primary sensitiser in the study population.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contact Dermatitis\",\"volume\":\"92 3\",\"pages\":\"217-223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contact Dermatitis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cod.14724\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contact Dermatitis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cod.14724","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:养蜂人因接触蜂产品和化学品而面临特殊的职业健康风险。蜂胶是导致养蜂人接触性过敏的一个显著原因。蜂胶的化学成分因地区而异,使过敏调查变得复杂。目的:评估养蜂人皮炎的发病率和模式,确定接触过敏者,并评估其对生活质量(QoL)的影响:方法:对印度北部克什米尔山谷的 340 名养蜂人进行了为期 18 个月的社区横断面研究。数据收集包括个人访谈、皮肤病检查以及使用自制的蜂胶、蜂蜡、蜂王浆抗原和标准化的印度基线标准系列进行斑贴测试。皮肤病生活质量指数(DLQI)用于衡量皮炎对生活质量的影响:结果:养蜂人的皮炎发病率为 17.1%,其中大多数人表现为手部湿疹。据报告,77.6%的养蜂人在养蜂场工作后出现皮炎或皮炎恶化。研究发现,皮炎与养蜂时间长短有显著关系(P皮炎是养蜂人中常见的职业病,与养蜂时间长短和过敏史密切相关,但其对 QoL 的总体影响有限。蜂胶是研究人群中的主要致敏物质。
Prevalence, pattern, contact sensitisers and impact on quality-of-life of occupational dermatitis among beekeepers in North India
Background
Beekeepers face specific occupational health risks due to exposure to bee products and chemicals. Propolis is a notable cause of contact hypersensitivity in beekeepers. Its chemical composition varies by region, complicating allergy investigations. While propolis allergies are documented in Western populations, no studies exist in India.
Aim
To assess the prevalence and patterns of dermatitis among beekeepers, identify contact sensitisers and evaluate its impact on quality-of-life (QoL).
Methods
An 18-month community-based cross-sectional study was conducted involving 340 beekeepers from the Kashmir Valley in North India. Data collection included personal interviews, dermatological examinations and patch testing using self-made antigens of propolis, beeswax, royal jelly and standardised Baseline Indian Standard Series. The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was used to measure the impact of dermatitis on QoL.
Results
Dermatitis prevalence among beekeepers was 17.1%, with the majority presenting with hand eczema. Onset or worsening of dermatitis was reported by 77.6% after working in apiaries. Significant associations were found with duration of beekeeping (p < 0.05) and a history of atopy (p < 0.001). Patch testing revealed 27.5% of beekeepers with positive reactions, primarily to propolis (10% in pet). The mean DLQI score was 3.5, indicating a generally small impact on QoL.
Conclusion
Dermatitis was a common occupational condition among beekeepers, strongly associated with the duration of beekeeping and a history of atopy, though its overall impact on QoL was limited. Propolis emerged as a primary sensitiser in the study population.
期刊介绍:
Contact Dermatitis is designed primarily as a journal for clinicians who are interested in various aspects of environmental dermatitis. This includes both allergic and irritant (toxic) types of contact dermatitis, occupational (industrial) dermatitis and consumers" dermatitis from such products as cosmetics and toiletries. The journal aims at promoting and maintaining communication among dermatologists, industrial physicians, allergists and clinical immunologists, as well as chemists and research workers involved in industry and the production of consumer goods. Papers are invited on clinical observations, diagnosis and methods of investigation of patients, therapeutic measures, organisation and legislation relating to the control of occupational and consumers".