Abstract
The electronic industry employs millions of people worldwide. The size of workforce and the use of hazardous chemicals may lead one to suppose that the number of occupational dermatological cases should be large.
The industry is constantly changing as a result of evolving scientific knowledge and increasing demand. The manufacture of goods is evermore automated. There is heightened productivity. Cheap labor costs elsewhere means that the UK workforce is now more involved with product design and innovation.
A semiconductor is a material that has an electrical conductivity between that of a conductor and an insulator. Devices made from these materials form the vital components of almost all electronic products. Historically silicon has been the most widely used, though gallium arsenide and various other materials are assuming increasing importance.
The basic steps involved in chip manufacture are chip design, crystal purification and growth, wafer preparation, epitaxy and oxidation, photolithography, doping and type conversion, metallization, and interconnection formation. Device assembly involves chip separation, die attach bonding, wire bonding, encapsulation, housing, marking, and testing.
New materials are developed and used before reliable toxicological data is produced. Secrecy within the industry makes it impossible to produce exhaustive lists of the chemicals used. To investigate a case of occupational-related dermatosis, patients must be managed individually, taking into account at which stage in chip manufacturing they work and what chemicals they use.
There is little information available on precisely how common occupationally related skin disorders in this industry are. Both ICD and ACD appear to be important, and the major hazards are solvents, metals, soldering flux, epoxy and acrylate resins, oils and coolants, fiberglass, and rubber chemicals.
Despite the size and hazards of the electronic industry, it is considered to be relatively safe with regard to cutaneous risk. The incidence of occupational skin disease among its workers is much lower than in other manufacturing industries. This may be due to processes taking place in closed systems with a high degree of automation. Worker exposure to the chemicals involved is minimal; but cleaning, repair, and maintenance staff are at special risk. However, the lower incidence may be accounted for by the industry being “top heavy,” the underreporting of skin disease, and debate over which processes fall into the “electronic industry.”
References
Aalto-Korte K, Suuronen K, Kuuliala O, Henriks-Eckerman M-L, Jolanki R (2012) Occupational contact allergy to monomeric isocyanates. Contact Dermatitis 67:78–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2011.02049.x
Adams RM (1986) Dermatitis in the microelectronics industry. LaDou J State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, 155–165
Adams RM (1990) The semiconductor industry. In: Adams RM (ed) Occupational skin disease, 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 408–425
Ali SA (1997) Occupational dermatitis in the manufacture of colour television tubes. Am J Contact Dermat 8(4):222–224
Amato I (1997) The semiconducting menagerie. Sci Am (Special Issue: The solid state century) 8(1):82–83
Barrett CR (1997) From sand to silicon: manufacturing an integrated circuit. Sci Am (Special issue: The solid state century) 8(1):56–61
Bazin BH et al (1986) Allergy to diphenylamine from an industrial grease. Contact Dermatitis 15:51
Beasley RWR (1988) An OH guide to the semiconductor industry. Occup Health (Lond) 40(9):640–650
Bennett DE et al (1988) Dermatitis from plastic tote boxes impregnated with an antistatic agent. J Occup Med 30:252–255
Bjorkner B (1981) Occupational cold urticaria from contact spray. Contact Dermatitis 7:338–339
Calnan CD (1995) Cyanoacrylate dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 5:165–167
Cohen R (1986) Radiofrequency and microwave radiation in the microelectronics industry. In: LaDou J (ed) State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, pp 145–154
Conde-Salazar L et al (1988) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from anaerobic acrylic sealants. Contact Dermatitis 18:129–132
Cone JE (1986) Health hazards of solvents in the microelectronics industry. LaDou J State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, 69–88
Courtney D (1983) Health and safety in soft soldering. Circ World 9:2–5
Crow D et al (1968) Amine flux sensitization dermatitis in electricity cable joiners. Brit J Dermatol 80:701–710
Ducatman AM et al (1991) Occupational physician staffing in large US corporations. J Occup Med 33(5):613–618
Edelman P (1986) Hydroflouric acid burns. In: LaDou J (ed) State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, pp 89–104
Employment and Labour Market (2017) Office of National Statistics [accessed online]. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/datasets/employmentbyoccupationemp04
Estlander T et al (1986) Dermatitis and urticaria from rubber and plastic gloves. Contact Dermatitis 14:20–25
Fischer T et al (1987) Unhardened epoxy resin in tool handles. Contact Dermatitis 16:45
Foussereau J, Muslmani M, Clvelier C, Herve-Bazin B (1986) Contact allergy to safety shoes. Contact Dermatitis 14:233–236
Garabrant DH, Olin R (1986) Carcinogens and cancer risk in the microelectronics industry. LaDou J State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, 119–134
Geiser K (1986) Health hazards in the microelectronics industry. Int J Health Serv 16(1):105–120
Goh CL (1985) Occupational dermatitis from soldering flux among workers in the electronics industry. Contact Dermatitis 13:85–90
Goh CL (1994) Common industrial processes and occupational irritants and allergens – an update. Ann Acad Med Singap 23(5):690–698
Goh CL, Ng SK (1987) Airborne contact dermatitis to colophony. Contact Dermatitis 17:89–91
Goh CL, Soh SD (1984) Occupational dermatitis in Singapore. Contact Dermatitis 11:288–293
Guest R (1991) Clean room and itchy faces. J Soc Occup Med 41:37–40
Harrison RJ (1986) Gallium arsenide. In: LaDou J (ed) State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, pp 49–58
Health and Safety Executive (2017) Work-related skin disease in Great Britain 2017 [accessed online]. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/causdis/dermatitis/skin.pdf
Hsieh MY et al (2001) Morphology of glass fibers in electronics workers with fiberglass dermatitis – a scanning electron microscopy study. Int J Dermatol 40(4):258–261
Jolanki R et al (1994) Concomitant sensitization to triglycidyl isocyanurate, diaminodiphenylmethane and 2-hydroxymethacrylate for silk screen printing coatings in the manufacture of circuit boards. Contact Dermatitis 30(1):12–15
Kiec-Swierczynska M (1988) The role of metals in the development of allergy in workers in the electrotechnical industry. Przegl Dermatol 75(4):272–276
Koh D (1993) A study of occupational dermatoses in the electronics industry. J Occup Med Singapore 5:1–7
Koh D (1995) An outbreak of occupational dermatosis in an electronics store. Contact Dermatitis 32(6):327–330
Koh D (1997) Electronics industry. Clin Dermatol 15(4):579–586
Koh D, Khoo NY (1994) Identification of a printed circuit board causing fibreglass skin irritation among electronics workers. Contact Dermatitis 30(1):46–47
Koh D et al (1990) Dermatological hazards in the microelectronics industry. Contact Dermatitis 22:1–7
Koh D et al (1992) Fibreglass dermatitis from printed circuit boards. Am J Inter Med 21(2):193–198
Koh D et al (1995) An occupational mark of screwdriver operators. Contact Dermatitis 32(1):46
Koh D et al (2001) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis in Singapore. Sci Total Environ 270(1–3):97–101
Leow YH et al (1995) Allergic contact dermatitis from epoxy resin in Singapore. Contact Dermatitis 33:355–356
Lewis DR (1986) Dopant materials used in the microelectronics industry. LaDou J State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, 35–48
Liden C (1984) Patch testing with soldering fluxes. Contact Dermatitis 10:119–120
Mastromatteo E (1971) Cutting oils and squamous cell carcinoma. Part 1: incidence in a plant with a report of six cases. Br J Ind Med 12:240–243
Mathias CGT, Adams RM (1984) Allergic contact dermatitis from rosin used as a soldering flux. J Am Acad Dermatol 10:454–456
Mathias CGT, Maibach HI (1984) Allergic contact dermatitis to anaerobic sealants. Arch Dermatol 120:1202–1205
McBirney RS (1954) Trichoroethylene and dichloroethylene poisoning. Arch Ind Hygiene 10:130–133
Meyer JD, Chen Y, Holt DL, Beck MH, Cherry NM (2000) Occupational Contact Dermatitis in the UK: A Surveillance Report from EPIDERM and OPRA. Occup Med 50(4):265–273
Morgan DV, Board K (1985) An introduction to semiconductor microtechnology. Wiley, Chichester
Nelemans PJ et al (1993) Melanoma and occupation: results of a case-control study in the Netherlands. Br J Ind Med 50(7):642–646
Nethercott JR et al (1982) Erythema multiforme exudativum linked to the manufacture of printed circuit boards. Contact Dermatitis 8:314–322
Nishioka K et al (1988) Occupational contact allergy to triglycidyl isocyanurate (TGIC, Tepic). Contact Dermatitis 19:379–380
Oldham WG (1977) The fabrication of microelectronic circuits. Sci Am 237(3):110–128
Patussi V et al (1986) Dermatitie da contatto alla Loctitie serie 200. Ital Derm Ven 121:117–119
Phoon WH et al (1984) Stevens-Johnson syndrome associated with occupational exposure to trichloroethylene. Contact Dermatitis 10:270–276
Ranchoff RE, Taylor JS (1985) Contact dermatitis to anaerobic sealants. J Am Acad Dermatol 13:1015–1020
Rapson WS (1985) Skin contact with gold and gold alloys. Contact Dermatitis 13:56–65
Redmond SF, Schappert KR (1987) Occupational dermatitis associated with garment. J Occup Med 29:243–244
Rischitelli G (2005) Dermatitis in a printed-circuit board manufacturing facility. Contact Dermatitis 52(2):78–81
Rivers RJK, Rycroft RJG (1987) Occupational contact urticaria from colophony. Contact Dermatitis 17:181
Robinson AL (1983) GaAs readied for high speed microcircuits. Science 219:275–277
Rohm T (1990) The semiconductor industry. In: Adams RM (ed) Occupational skin disease, 2nd edn. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 408–425
Rohm T et al (1986) The chemical nature of the microelectronics industry. In: LaDou J (ed) State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, pp 13–34
Rubin W, Allen BM (1972) The chemistry and behaviour of fluxes. Trans Inst Met Finish 50:133–137
Rudolph L, Swan SA (1986) Reproductive hazards in the microelectronics industry. In: LaDou J (ed) State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, pp 135–144
Rycroft RJG, Smith WDL (1980) Low humidity occupational dermatoses. Contact Dermatitis 6:488–492
Shiao JS et al (2004) Prevalence and risk factors of occupational hand dermatoses in electronics workers. Toxicol Ind Health 20(1–5):1–7
Sonnex TS, Rycroft RJG (1986) Dermatitis from phenylsalicylate in safety spectacle frames. Contact Dermatitis 14:268–270
Stevenson CJ, Morgan PR (1983) Investigation and prevention of chromate dermatitis in television manufacture. J Soc Occup Med 33:19–20
Stewart RD et al (1974) Degreaser’s flush. Arch Environ Health 29:1–5
Sun CC et al (1995) Occupational hand dermatitis in a tertiary referral dermatology clinic in Taipei. Contact Dermatitis 33:414–418
Tan HH et al (1997) Occupational skin disease in workers from the electronics industry in Singapore. Am J Contact Dermat 8(4):210–214
Teitelbaum DT (1986) Photoactive chemicals used in photoresist systems. LaDou J State of the art reviews: occupational medicine. Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia, 59–68
Tosti A et al (1986) Contact urticaria from poly propylene. Contact Dermatitis 15:51
Tosti A et al (1993) Occupational skin hazards from synthetic plastics. Toxicol Ind Health 9(3):493–502
Tosti A et al (1998) Occupational airborne contact dermatitis to epoxy resin. Contact Dermatitis 19:220–222
U.S.A. Bureau of Labor (2016) Employment projections [accessed online]. Available at https://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_207.htm
U.S.A. Sales Data (2007) U.S. census bureau, 2007 economic census www.census.gov
Ungers LJ et al (1985) Release of arsenic from semiconductor wafers. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 46:416–420
US Department of Health and Human Services (1985) Hazard assessment of the electronic component manufacturing industry, DHHS(NIOSH) Publication No. Centers for Disease Contol, Cincinnati 85–100
Vagero D, Olin R (1983) Incidence of cancer in the electronics industry: using the new Swedish cancer environment registry as a screening instrument. Brit J Med 40:188–192
Wald PH, Jones JR (1987) Semiconductor manufacturing: an introduction to processes and hazards. Am J Ind Med 11:203–221
Walder BK (1983) Do solvents cause scleroderma? Int J Dermatol 22:157–158
Waterhouse JAH (1971) Cutting oils and cancer. Ann Occup Hyg 14:171–180
Wheeler CE et al (1965) Dermatitis from hydrazine hydrobromide solder flux. Arch Dermatol 91:235–239
Widstrom L (1983) Contact allergy to colophony in soldering flux. Contact Dermatitis 9:205–207
Xu X et al (2009) Severe hypersensitivity dermatitis and liver dysfunction induced by occupational exposure to trichloroethylene. Ind Health 47(2):107–112
Yamakage A, Ishikawa H (1982) Generalised morphoea-like scleroderma occurring in people exposed to organic solvents. Dermalogica 165:186–193
Yokota K et al (2000) Occupational dermatoses from one-component epoxy coatings containing a modified polyamine hardener. Ind Health 38(3):269–272
Yokota K et al (2002) Occupational dermatitis from a one-component naphthalene type epoxy adhesive. Ind Health 40(1):63–65
Yokota K et al (2004) Occupational dermatitis from soldering flux. Ind Health 42(3):383–384
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Roberts, E.J., Smith, V., English, J.S.C. (2018). The Electronic Industry. In: John, S., Johansen, J., Rustemeyer, T., Elsner, P., Maibach, H. (eds) Kanerva’s Occupational Dermatology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40221-5_60-2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40221-5_60-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-40221-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-40221-5
eBook Packages: Springer Reference MedicineReference Module Medicine