Hexavalent chromium in cement is a common cause of occupational allergic contact dermatitis (OACD).
Methods
Analysis of patch test data during 1999 to 2013 was done. Patients with cement-induced chromate OACD filled the Dermatology Life Quality Index, graded 1 to 5.
Results
Of 4846 consecutive patients who were patch tested, 146 (3%) were chromate-sensitive. Of 46 (31.5%) who presented with chromate OACD, 27 (59%) had cement-induced chromate OACD. The proportion of chromate-sensitive patients with clinically relevant cement exposure increased from 7.7% in 2002 to 2004 to 28.7% in 2011 to 2013 (P = 0.04). The median age of presentation was younger than for other chromate-sensitive patients (32 vs 42 years). Hand eczema (88.9%) was the most frequent clinical presentation. Of the 27 with cement-induced chromate OACD, 21 (77.8%) had ongoing dermatitis at the time of the review. Although 14/27 (51.9%) changed their occupation to avoid exposure to cement, symptoms persisted in 9/14 (64.3%). Prolonged exposure to cement before development of symptoms was associated with chronicity. All the symptomatic patients experienced at least a moderate effect on their quality of life (grade 3 or higher on the Dermatology Life Quality Index).
Conclusions
We recommend the adoption of the European legislation in Israel, to reduce the prevalence of chromate OACD from cement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WinderC, CarmodyM. The dermal toxicity of cement. Toxicol Ind Health, 2002; 18:321–331.
BockM, SchmidtA, BrucknerT, et al.Occupational skin disease in the construction industry. Br J Dermatol, 2003; 149:1165–1171.
4.
RäsänenL, SainioH, LehtoM, et al.Lymphocyte proliferation test as a diagnostic aid in chromium contact sensitivity. Contact Dermatitis, 1991; 25:25–29.
CahillJ, KeegelT, NixonR. The prognosis of occupational contact dermatitis in 2004. Contact Dermatitis, 2004; 51:219–226.
7.
BurrowsD, CalnanCD. Cement dermatitis. II. Clinical aspects. Trans St Johns Hosp Dermatol Soc, 1965; 51:27–39.
8.
GammelgaardB, FullertonA, AvnstorpC, et al.Permeation of chromium salts through human skin in vitro. Contact Dermatitis, 1992; 27:302–310.
9.
AvnstorpC.Follow-up of workers from the prefabricated concrete industry after the addition of ferrous sulphate to Danish cement. Contact Dermatitis, 1989; 20:365–371.
10.
FinlayAY, KhanGK. Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)—a simple practical measure for routine clinical use. Clin Exp Dermatol, 1994; 19:210–216.
AvnstorpC.Cement workers. In: KanervaL, ElsnerP, WahlbergJE, et al., eds. Handbook of Occupational Dermatology. Berlin: Springer; 2000:875–877.
13.
NielsenNH, MennéT. Allergic contact sensitization in an unselected Danish population. The Glostrup Allergy Study, Denmark. Acta Derm Venereol, 1992; 72:456–460.
14.
LantingaH, NaterJP, CoenraadsPJ. Prevalence, incidence and course of eczema on the hands and forearms in a sample of the general population. Contact Dermatitis, 1984; 10:135–139.
15.
SeidenariS, ManziniBM, DaneseP, et al.Patch and prick test study of 593 healthy subjects. Contact Dermatitis, 1990; 23:162–167.
16.
IrvineC, PughCE, HansenEJ, et al.Cement dermatitis in underground workers during construction of the Channel Tunnel. Occup Med (Lond), 1994; 44:17–23.
17.
WangBJ, WuJD, SheuSC, et al.Occupational hand dermatitis among cement workers in Taiwan. J Formos Med Assoc, 2011; 110:775–779.
18.
PiriläV, KajanneA. Sensitization to cobalt and nickel in cement eczema. Acta Derm Venereol, 1965; 45:9–14.
19.
GeierJ, KrautheimA, UterW, et al.Occupational contact allergy in the building trade in Germany: influence of preventive measures and changing exposure. Int Arch Occup Environ Health, 2011; 84:403–411.
20.
FregertS, GruvbergerB. Solubility of cobalt in cement. Contact Dermatitis, 1978; 4:14–18.
21.
HellierFF.The prognosis in industrial dermatitis. Br Med J, 1958; 1:196–198.
22.
FregertS.Occupational dermatitis in a 10-year material. Contact Dermatitis, 1975; 1:96–107.
23.
KeczkesK, BhateSM, WyattEH. The outcome of primary irritant hand dermatitis. Br J Dermatol, 1983; 109:665–668.
24.
PryceDW, IrvineD, EnglishJS, et al.Soluble oil dermatitis: a follow-up study. Contact Dermatitis, 1989; 21:28–35.
25.
KalimoK, KautiainenH, NiskanenT, et al.‘Eczema school’ to improve compliance in an occupational dermatology clinic. Contact Dermatitis, 1999; 41:315–319.
26.
AdiseshA, MeyerJD, CherryNM. Prognosis and work absence due to occupational contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis, 2002; 46:273–279.
27.
HolnessDL, NethercottJR. Work outcome in workers with occupational skin disease. Am J Ind Med, 1995; 27:807–815.
28.
LipsR, RastH, ElsnerP. Outcome of job change in patients with occupational chromate dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis, 1996; 34:268–271.
29.
HutchingsCV, ShumKW, GawkrodgerDJ. Occupational contact dermatitis has an appreciable impact on quality of life. Contact Dermatitis, 2001; 45:17–20.
30.
HolnessDL.Results of a quality of life questionnaire in a patch test clinic population. Contact Dermatitis, 2001; 44:80–84.
31.
ZachariaeCO, AgnerT, MennéT. Chromium allergy in consecutive patients in a country where ferrous sulfate has been added to cement since 1981. Contact Dermatitis, 1996; 35:83–85.
32.
StocksSJ, McNameeR, TurnerS, et al.Has European Union legislation to reduce exposure to chromate in cement been effective in reducing the incidence of allergic contact dermatitis attributed to chromate in the UK?. Occup Environ Med, 2012; 69:150–152.
33.
Danish Working Environment Service. Statutory Order of the Danish Working Environment Service. No. 661 of 28 November 1983.
34.
JohansenJd, MennéT, ChristophersenJ, et al.Changes in the pattern of sensitization to common contact allergens in Denmark between 1985–86 and 1997–98, with a special view to the effect of preventive strategies. Br J Dermatol, 2000; 142:490–495.
35.
ThyssenJP, JensenP, CarlsenBC, et al.The prevalence of chromium allergy in Denmark is currently increasing as a result of leather exposure. Br J Dermatol, 2009; 161:1288–1293.
36.
RotoP, SainioH, ReunalaT, et al.Addition of ferrous sulfate to cement and risk of chromium dermatitis among construction workers. Contact Dermatitis, 1996; 34:43–50.
37.
UterW, RühlR, PfahlbergA, et al.Contact allergy in construction workers: results of a multifactorial analysis. Ann Occup Hyg, 2004; 48:21–27.
38.
MarksJG, BelsitoDV, DeLeoVA, et al.North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results for the detection of delayed-type hypersensitivity to topical allergens. J Am Acad Dermatol, 1998; 38:911–918.
39.
OlsavszkyR, RycroftR, WhiteI, et al.Contact sensitivity to chromate: comparison at a London contact dermatitis clinic over a 10-year period. Contact Dermatitis, 1998; 38:329–331.
40.
AthavaleP, ShumK, ChenY, et al.Occupational dermatitis related to chromium and cobalt: experience of dermatologists (EPIDERM) and occupational physicians (OPRA) in the UK over an 11-year period (1993–2004). Br J Dermatol, 2007; 157:518–522.
