A systematic approach to assessing the effectiveness of personal protective equipment for the skin from the effects of industrial factors

Abstract

Introduction. The causes of occupational skin diseases in 40% of cases are in the absence or unsatisfactory condition of dermatological personal protective equipment. Professional protective skin care remains the main requirement of occupational safety.
 The concept of skin screening is giving way to a new approach — the restoration of its own epidermal barrier. Etiopathogenetic prevention technologies are based on inactivation of irritating chemicals and allergens, binding and neutralization of heavy and alkaline earth metal ions, as well as platinoids. The safety assessment of dermatological personal protective equipment is regulated by the state and in accordance with TR CU 019/2011 "On the safety of personal protective equipment", and the effectiveness assessment is voluntary for manufacturers.
 The study aims to develop a scheme for conducting clinical testing of evaluation of dermatological personal protective equipment for workers exposed to certain production factors.
 Materials and methods. Skin tests are a standard method of allergological diagnosis.
 In order to exclude additional sensitization that occurs when taking skin samples with a production allergen, for the reliability of detecting preclinical manifestations of sensitization, the researchers used an in vitro diagnostic method (determination of specific immunoglobulin E — Ig E). To assess the effectiveness of dermatological personal protective equipment on persons working in contact with nickel-containing compounds, the authors determined the nickel content in the blood by atomic absorption method. They evaluated the barrier function of the skin using the "Skin-o-mat" device from "Cosmomed GmbH", Germany.
 Results. The specialists proposed a scheme for conducting clinical testing of the evaluation of dermatological personal protective equipment for workers, including an assessment of the barrier function of the skin and in vitro diagnostic methods. The authors evaluated the parameters in dynamics — before and after using. This scheme makes it possible to exclude additional sensitization of employees.
 Limitations. The study is limited by the number of workers who underwent periodic medical examinations at the clinic of Izmerov Research Institute of Occupational Health who have contact with nickel compounds in the workplace.
 Conclusion. The etiopathogenetic clinical approbation of the evaluation of the effectiveness of dermatological personal protective equipment on workers in production conditions includes an assessment of the skin and an assessment of the barrier-protective function of the skin with the fixation of indicators. To study the effectiveness of skin protection products, an important point is the rational and reasonable selection of groups of approbants on which the study of the protective properties of these products will be carried out.
 Ethics. The authors have carried out the study in accordance with the Ethical standard set out in the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association of 1964 (with amendments and additions from 2013).