The Correlation Between Symptoms, Frequent Use of Dental Polymers, and Evaluation of Health Risk

• Autorzy: Lonnroth E. C. , Shahnavaz H.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Dental personnel are at risk as they manually handle polymer products containing monomers and additives that cause irritation and induce allergy. Gloves and face masks can be easily penetrated by monomers. A total of 587 dental personnel and a referent group (585) in the 2 most northern regions of Sweden were included in a questionnaire study (response rate 76%). Questions were asked regarding symptoms of atopy, asthma, conjunctivitis, atopic dermatitis, hand dermatitis, and hay fever/rhinitis. The dental personnel were asked to give the name of polymer products used in their practice and the frequency of use. They were also asked to risk evaluate 5 different types of polymer materials on a scale from 1 to 5. Analysis was done to find if the occurrence of a symptom was associated with a high risk evaluation of a polymer material, or with frequent use of a certain polymer product. Significantly more dentists reported symptoms of atopic dermatitis and conjunctivitis compared to referents and chair assistants. Results show that dental personnel with symptoms risk evaluated most materials significantly higher than dental personnel without symptoms. Further, the occurrence of some symptoms was associated with frequent use of 8 polymer products.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

dental personnel; correlation analysis; self-reported symptoms; dental polymer use; health risk evaluation

PL

personel dentystyczny; analiza korelacji; ryzyko zdrowotne

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 1998
• Tom: Vol. 4, No. 4
• Strony: 411--421
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 22 poz., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Lonnroth E. C.

• Lulea University of Technology, Sweden

autor

Shahnavaz H.

• Lulea University of Technology, Sweden

Bibliografia

• 1.Arisu, K., Hayakawa, R., Ogino, Y., Matsunga, K., & Kaniwa, M. (1992). Tintivin P in spandex tape as a cause of clothing dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis, 26, 311-316.
• 2.Collard, S.M., Vogel, J.J., & Ladd, G.D. (1991). Respirability, microstructure and filler content of composite dusts. American Dental Journal, 4, 143-152.
• 3.Estlander, T., Kanerva, L., Kari, O., Jolanki, R., & Molso, R. (1996). Occupational conjunctivitis associated with type IV allergy to methacrylates. Allergy, 5(1), 56-59.
• 4.Hensten-Pettersen, A., & Jacobsen, N. (1991). Perceived side effects of biomaterials in prosthetic dentistry. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 65, 138-144.
• 5.Kanerva, L., Estlander, T., Jolanki, R., & Henriks-Eckerman, M.-L. (1995a). Allergy caused by acrylate compounds at the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (FIOH) 1975-1995. In Proceedings o f Sixth FIOH -NIOSH Joint Symposium on Occupational Health and Safety, Espoo, Finland (People and Work. Research Reports, 3; pp. 128-134). Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.
• 6.Kanerva, L., Estlander, T., Jolanki, R., & Tarvainen, K. (1993). Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by exposure to acrylates. Contact Dermatitis, 28, 268-275.
• 7.Kanerva, L., Estlander, T., Jolanki, R., & Tarvainen, K. (1995b). Statistics on allergic patch test reactions caused by acrylate compounds, including data on ethyl methacrylate. American Journal of Contact Dermatitis, 6, 75-77.
• 8.Koppula, S.V., Fellman, J.H., & Storrs, W. (1995). Screening allergens for acrylic dermatitis associated with artificial nails. American Journal of Contact Dermatitis, 6, 78-85.
• 9.Lonnroth, E.-C., & Shahnavaz, H. (1997). Use of polymer materials in dental clinics, case study. Swedish Dental Journal, 21, 149-159.
• 10.Lonnroth, E.-C., & Shahnavaz, H. (1998). Adverse health reaction in skin, eyes, and respiratory tract among dental personnel in Sweden. Swedish Dental Journal, 22, 33-45.
• 11.Milne, J.A. (1976). The skin. Inflammatory conditions. In J.R. Andersen (Ed.), Muirs’s textbook of pathology (10th ed., pp. 987-988). London: Edward Arnold.
• 12.Moody, W.L. (1941). Severe reaction from acrylic liquid. Dental Digest, 47, 305.
• 13.Munksgaard, E.C. (1992). Permeability of protective gloves to (di)methacrylates in resinous dental materials. Scandinavian Journal of Dental Research, 100, 182-192.
• 14.Munksgaard, E.C., & Knutsen, B. (1990). Kontaktallergisk handeksem blandt tandplejepersonale af (di) metakrylater [Allergic contact dermatitis among dental personnel due to (di)methacrylates], Tandlegebladet, 94, 7.
• 15.Ruyter, I.E., & Oysaed, H. (1988). Analysis and characterisation of dental polymers. Critical Reviews in Biocompability, 4, 247-249.
• 16.Savonius, B., Keskinen, K., Tupparainen, M., & Kanerva, L. (1993). Occupational respiratory disease caused by acrylates. Clinical and Experimental Allergy, 23, 416-424.
• 17.Stoy, N. (1952). Denture sore mouth with particular reference to acrylates. Journal of Irish Dental Association, 7, 13.
• 18.Stevenson, W. J. (1941). Methyl-methacrylate dermatitis. Contact Point, 19, 171.
• 19.Tarlo, S.K., Sussman, G.L., & Holness, D.L. (1997). Latex sensitivity in dental students and staff. A cross sectional study. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 99(3), 396-401.
• 20.Torres, V., Mano-Azul, A., Correia, T., & Soares, A.P. (1993). Allergic contact cheilitis stomatitis from hydroquinone in acrylic dental prosthetis. Contact Dermatitis, 29(2), 102-103.
• 21.Tosti, A., Bardazzi, F., Piancastelli, E., & Braisle, G.P. (1990). Contact stomatitis due to N,N-dimethyl-paratoluidine. Contact Dermatitis, 22, 62-63.
• 22.Vershueren, G.L., & Bruynzeel, D.P. (1991). Allergy to N,N-dimethyl-p-toluidine in dental materials. Contact Dermatitis, 24, 149.