Cargando…

Outbreak of occupational allergic contact dermatitis from a smartphone screen protector glue

BACKGROUND: Sensitization to acrylates is a concern in the occupational/environmental dermatology field. OBJECTIVE: To describe an occupational allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) outbreak from a smartphone screen protector glue. METHODS: Thirteen affected workers of a chain store selling phone screen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Herreros‐Montejano, Francisca, Mowitz, Martin, Heras‐Mendaza, Felipe, Sanz‐Sánchez, Tatiana, Gatica‐Ortega, María Elena, López‐Mateos, Ana, Valenzuela‐Oñate, Cristian, Faura‐Berruga, Cristina, Zaragoza‐Ninet, Violeta, Bruze, Magnus, Svedman, Cecilia, Pastor‐Nieto, María Antonia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9313874/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35184294
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cod.14079
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Sensitization to acrylates is a concern in the occupational/environmental dermatology field. OBJECTIVE: To describe an occupational allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) outbreak from a smartphone screen protector glue. METHODS: Thirteen affected workers of a chain store selling phone screen protectors were investigated in five Spanish dermatology departments. The glue datasheet and label were assessed. A chemical analysis of the glue was performed. Based on this, some patients underwent additional testing. RESULTS: All patients (all female, mean age: 25) had severe fingertip dermatitis. The datasheet/label indicated that the glue contained isobornyl acrylate (IBOA), a “photoinitiator” and polyurethane oligomer. The company informed us that the ingredients were polyurethane acrylate, “methacrylate” (unspecified), acrylic acid, hydroxyethyl methacrylate, propylmethoxy siloxane, and photoinitiator 184. Isobornyl acrylate (or IBOA) and N,N‐dimethylacrylamide (DMAA) were patch tested in eight and two cases, respectively, with negative results. A chemical analysis revealed 4‐acryloylmorpholine (ACMO); isobornyl methacrylate (IBMA), and lauryl acrylate in one glue sample. Seven patients were patch tested with dilutions of the identified substances and six of seven were positive for ACMO 0.5% pet. CONCLUSION: An outbreak of occupational ACD, likely from ACMO in a glue is described. Further investigations are needed to corroborate the role played by each compound identified in the chemical analyses.