Personal care products marketed for babies and children are often regarded as “safe” or “gentle.” However, little is known about the prevalence of contact allergens in these types of products.
Objective
This study assessed the prevalence of important sensitizers in personal care products marketed for babies and children. A secondary objective of this study was to determine whether a product's cost correlates with content of sensitizing ingredients.
Methods
The ingredient lists of 533 unique personal care products were analyzed for presence of fragrance, betaines, propylene glycol, methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone, formaldehyde, lanolin, and neomycin. Price per ounce was determined for each product as well.
Conclusions
Most personal care products for babies and children contain 1 or more sensitizers. Products containing more sensitizers tend to cost less than those without any sensitizing ingredients.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AngeliniG, MeneghiniCL. Contact and bacterial allergy in children with atopic dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis, 1977; 3(3):163–167.
2.
SimonsenAB, DeleuranM, JohansenJD, et al.Contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis in children—a review of current data. Contact Dermatitis, 2011; 65(5):254–265.
3.
JacobSE, HerroEM, SullivanK, et al.Safety and efficacy evaluation of TRUE TEST panels 1.1, 2.1, and 3.1 in children and adolescents. Dermatitis, 2011; 22(4):204–210.
4.
ZugKA, McGinley-SmithD, WarshawEM, et al.Contact allergy in children referred for patch testing: North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 2001–2004. Arch Dermatol, 2008; 144(10):1329–1336.
5.
JacobSE, SteeleT, BrodB, et al.Dispelling the myths behind pediatric patch testing-experience from our tertiary care patch testing centers. Pediatr Dermatol, 2008; 25(3):296–300.
AdmaniS, JacobSE. Allergic contact dermatitis in children: review of the past decade. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep, 2014; 14(4):421.
8.
BrucknerAL, WestonWL, MorelliJG. Does sensitization to contact allergens begin in infancy?. Pediatrics, 2000; 105(1):e3.
9.
Belloni FortinaA, RomanoI, PesericoA, et al.Contact sensitization in very young children. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2011; 65(4):772–779.
10.
SteeleT, ConnellyEA, JacobSE. Patch testing in the pediatric population: does atopy predispose to detergent allergy?. Dermatitis, 2006; 17(2):96.
11.
SchenaD, PapagrigorakiA, TessariG, et al.Allergic contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis. Dermatitis, 2012; 23(6):275–280.
12.
JacobSE, BrodB, CrawfordGH. Clinically relevant patch test reactions in children—a United States based study. Pediatr Dermatol, 2008; 25(5):520–527.
13.
WarshawEM, BottoNC, MaibachHI, et al.Positive patch-test reactions to propylene glycol: a retrospective cross-sectional analysis from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 1996 to 2006. Dermatitis, 2009; 20(1):14–20.
GuinJD, KincannonJ, ChurchFL. Baby-wipe dermatitis: preservative-induced hand eczema in parents and persons using moist towelettes. Am J Contact Dermat, 2001; 12(4):189–192.
18.
JacobSE, BarronGS. Benzyl alcohol: a covert fragrance. Dermatitis, 2007; 18(4):232–233.
19.
SeidenariS, GiustiF, PepeP, et al.Contact sensitization in 1094 children undergoing patch testing over a 7-year period. Pediatr Dermatol, 2005; 22(1):1–5.
SuuronenK, PesonenM, Aalto-KorteK. Occupational contact allergy to cocamidopropyl betaine and its impurities. Contact Dermatitis, 2012; 66(5):286–292.
22.
LessmannH, SchnuchA, GeierJ, et al.Skin-sensitizing and irritant properties of propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis, 2005; 53(5):247–259.
23.
ZugKA, PhamAK, BelsitoDV, et al.Patch testing in children from 2005 to 2012: results from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Dermatitis, 2014; 25(6):345–355.
MachetL, CouhéC, PerrinaudA, et al.A high prevalence of sensitization still persists in leg ulcer patients: a retrospective series of 106 patients tested between 2001 and 2002 and a meta-analysis of 1975–2003 data. Br J Dermatol, 2004; 150(5):929–935.
