Patch Testing with Patient’s Own Materials Handled at Work

  • Andrea Krautheim
  • Holger LessmannEmail author
  • Johannes GeierEmail author
Living reference work entry


Contact allergy can only be detected if the causative allergen is tested. Therefore, patch testing of a patient’s own material is an important diagnostic measure in suspected allergic contact dermatitis to occupationally handled products, but it is not a trivial task.

Standardized patch test concentrations for occupationally used products and most of their components are lacking. Therefore, the choice of an appropriate dilution and a suitable vehicle is of great concern to minimize the risk of false-negative, false-positive reactions or even active sensitization and to eventually reveal the cause of the disease.


ESSCA MSDS Patch testing 


  1. Adams RM (1997) Reflecting on developments in occupational dermatitis. Clin Dermatol 15:473–477CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakker JG, Jongen SM, Van Neer FC, Neis JM (1991) Occupational contact dermatitis due to acrylonitrile. Contact Dermatitis 24:50–53CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Balzer C, Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W (2005) Ergebnisse der Epikutantestung mit patienteneigenen Kosmetika und Körperpflegemitteln im IVDK, 1998–2002. Derm Beruf Umwelt 53:8–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergh M (1999) Allergenic oxidation products in ethoxylated non-ionic surfactants. Chemical characterization and studies on allergenic activity and physicochemical behavior. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 205:1–26Google Scholar
  5. Brooke R, Beck MH (1998) Contact allergy to 2,4,6-tris(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol. Contact Dermatitis 38:284–285CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruze M (1984) Use of buffer solutions for patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 10:267–269CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruze M, Björkner B, Lepoittevin JP (1995) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from ethyl cyanoacrylate. Contact Dermatitis 32:156–159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bruze M, Frick M, Persson L (2003) Patch testing with thin-layer chromatograms. Contact Dermatitis 48: 278–279CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Daecke CM, Schaller J, Goos M (1994) Value of the patient’s own test substances in epicutaneous testing. Hautarzt 45:292–298CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. De Groot AC (2008) Patch testing. Test concentrations and vehicles for 4350 chemicals, 3rd edn. Acdegroot Publishing, WapserveenGoogle Scholar
  11. Deutsches Arzneibuch (1996) Deutscher Apotheker Verlag, Stuttgart, Govi-Verlag, Frankfurt a.M, p VII.1.3. 2Google Scholar
  12. Dickel H, Scola N, Altmeyer P (2009a) The strip patch test-indication in occupational dermatology demonstrated with a case history. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 7:965–967PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Dickel H, Kamphowe J, Geier J, Altmeyer P, Kuss O (2009b) Strip patch test vs. conventional patch test: investigation of dose-dependent test sensitivities in nickel- and chromium-sensitive subjects. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 23:1018–1025CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Dooms-Goossens A (1995) Patch testing withaout a kit. In: Guin JD (ed) Practical contact dermatitis: a handbook for the practitioner. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 63–74Google Scholar
  15. ESSCA Writing Group (2008) The European Surveillance System of Contact Allergies (ESSCA): results of patch testing the standard series, 2004. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 22:174–181Google Scholar
  16. Estlander T, Kanerva L, Talola P, Jolanki R, Soini M (2001) Aziridine hardener–a new sensitizer in the dyeing of leather. Contact Dermatitis 44:107–109CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Fischer T, Maibach HI (1986) Antigen preparation for the patch test. Occup Med 1:343–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Flyvholm MA (2005) Preservatives in registered chemical products. Contact Dermatitis 53:27–32CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Foti C, Zambonin CG, Cassano N, Aresta A, Damascelli A, Ferrara F, Vena GA (2009) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis associated with dimethyl fumarate in clothing. Contact Dermatitis 61:122–124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Foussereau J, Benezra C, Maibach H (1982) Occupational contact dermatitis. Clinical and chemical aspects. Munksgaard, KopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  21. Fregert S (1985) Publication of allergens. Contact Dermatitis 12:123–124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Frick M, Zimerson E, Karlsson D, Marand A, Skarping G, Isaksson M, Bruze M (2004) Poor correlation between stated and found concentrations of diphenylmethane-4,4′-diisocyanate (4,4′-MDI) in petrolatum patch-test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 51:73–78CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Frosch PJ, Weickel R, Schmitt T, Krastel H (1988) Side effects of external ophthalmologic drugs. Z Hautkr 63:126, 129–132, 135–136PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Frosch PJ, Pilz B, Peiler D, Dreier B, Rabenhorst S (1997) Die Epikutantestung mit patienteneigenen Produkten. In: Plewig G, Przybilla B (eds) Fortschritte der praktischen Dermatologie und Venerologie, vol 15. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 166–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frosch PJ, Geier J, Uter W, Goossens A (2006) Patch testing with the patients’ own products. In: Frosch PJ, Menné T, Lepoittevin J-P (eds) Contact dermatitis, 4th edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 929–941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Geier J, Brehler R, Eck E, Koch P, Peters K-P, Rakoski J, Rothe A, Schnuch A, Szliska C, Uter W (1999) Berufsspezifische Epikutantestung bei Maurern und Angehörigen verwandter Berufe. Empfehlungen der Arbeitsgruppe “Berufs-Testreihen” der Deutschen Kontaktallergie-Gruppe. Derm Beruf Umwelt 47: 29–33Google Scholar
  27. Geier J, Lessmann H, Schumacher T, Eckert C, Becker D, Boveleth W, Buß M, Eck E, Englitz H-G, Koch P, Müller J, Nöring R, Rocker M, Rothe A, Schmidt A, Uter W, Warfolomeow I, Zoellner G (2000) Vorschlag für die Epikutantestung bei Verdacht auf Kontaktallergie durch Kühlschmierstoffe. 1. Kommerziell erhältliche Testsubstanzen. Derm Beruf Umwelt 48:232–236Google Scholar
  28. Geier J, Lessmann H, Schmidt A, Englitz H-G, Schnuch A (2003a) Kontaktekzeme durch Kühlschmierstoffe in der Metallindustrie. Akt Dermatol 29:185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Geier J, Lessmann H, Frosch PJ, Pirker C, Koch P, Aschoff R, Richter G, Becker D, Eckert C, Uter W, Schnuch A, Fuchs T (2003b) Patch testing with components of water-based metalworking fluids. Contact Dermatitis 49:85–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Geier J, Uter W, Lessmann H, Frosch PJ (2004a) Patch testing with metalworking fluids from the patient’s workplace. Contact Dermatitis 51:172–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Geier J, Lessmann H, Hillen U, Jappe U, Dickel H, Koch P, Frosch PJ, Schnuch A, Uter W (2004b) An attempt to improve diagnostics of contact allergy due to epoxy resin systems. First results of the multicentre study EPOX 2002. Contact Dermatitis 51:263–272CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Geier J, Lessmann H, Becker D, Bruze M, Frosch PJ, Fuchs T, Jappe U, Koch P, Pföhler C, Skudlik C (2006) Patch testing with components of water-based metalworking fluids: results of a multicentre study with a second series. Contact Dermatitis 55:322–329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Geier J, Krautheim A, Lessmann H (2009) Allergologische Diagnostik und aktuelle Allergene in der Berufsdermatologie. Hautarzt 60:708–717CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Geier J, Krautheim A, Uter W, Lessmann H, Schnuch A (2011) Occupational contact allergy in the building trade in Germany: influence of preventive measures and changing exposure. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 84(4):403–411CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Geraut C, Tripodi D, Brunet-Courtois B, Leray F, Geraut L (2009) Occupational dermatitis to epoxydic and phenolic resins. Eur J Dermatol 19:205–213PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Giménez-Arnau A, Silvestre JF, Mercader P, De la Cuadra J, Ballester I, Gallardo F, Pujol RM, Zimerson E, Bruze M (2009) Shoe contact dermatitis from dimethyl fumarate: clinical manifestations, patch test results, chemical analysis, and source of exposure. Contact Dermatitis 61:249–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Goossens A, Detienne T, Bruze M (2002) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by isocyanates. Contact Dermatitis 47:304–308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Gruvberger B, Björkner B, Bruze M (1995) Contact allergy to dichlofluanide in humans and Guinea pigs. Am J Contact Dermat 6:221–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Guin JD (1995) Patch testing to plants: some practical aspects of what has become an esoteric area of contact dermatitis. Am J Contact Dermat 6:232–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hannuksela M, Salo H (1986) The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermatitis 14:221–227CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Hausen BM (1986) Contact allergy to woods. Clin Dermatol 4:65–76CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Hausen BM (1988) Allergiepflanzen, Pflanzenallergene. Handbuch und Atlas der allergieinduzierenden Wild- und Kulturpflanzen. Ecomed, Landsberg/LechGoogle Scholar
  43. Held E, Johansen JD, Agner T, Menné T (1999) Contact allergy to cosmetics: testing with patients’ own products. Contact Dermatitis 40:310–315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Henriks-Eckerman ML, Suuronen K, Jolanki R, Alanko K (2004) Methacrylates in dental restorative materials. Contact Dermatitis 50:233–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Henriks-Eckerman ML, Suuronen K, Jolanki R (2008) Analysis of allergens in metalworking fluids. Contact Dermatitis 59:261–267CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Hillen U, Brehler R, Dickel H, Eck E, Geier J, Koch P, Lessmann H, Peters K-P, Proske S, Rakoski J, Rothe A, Schnuch A, Szliska C, Uter W, Worm M (2006) Berufsspezifische Epikutantestung bei Malern und Lackierern – Empfehlungen der Arbeitsgruppe “Berufs-Testreihen” der Deutschen Kontaktallergie-Gruppe. Derm Beruf Umwelt 54:47–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jolanki R, Estlander T, Alanko K, Kanerva L (2000) Patch testing with a patient’s own materials handled at work. In: Kanerva L, Elsner P, Wahlberg JE, Maibach HI (eds) Handbook of occupational dermatology. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 375–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1988) Sensitization to patch test acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 18:10–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Kanerva L, Laine R, Jolanki R, Tarvainen K, Estlander T, Helander I (1991) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by nitroglycerin. Contact Dermatitis 24:356–362CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R, Tarvainen K (1995) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis and contact urticaria caused by polyfunctional aziridine hardener. Contact Dermatitis 33:304–309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1996) False negative patch test reaction caused by testing with dental composite acrylic resin. Int J Dermatol 35:189–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Kanerva L, Henriks-Eckerman ML, Jolanki R, Estlander T (1997a) Plastics/acrylics: material safety data sheets need to be improved. Clin Dermatol 15:533–546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Estlander T (1997b) 10 years of patch testing with the (meth)acrylate series. Contact Dermatitis 37:255–258CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Estlander T (1998) Occupational epoxy dermatitis with patch test reactions to multiple hardeners including tetraethylenepentamine. Contact Dermatitis 38:299–301CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Estlander T, Henriks-Eckerman M, Tuomi M, Tarvainen K (2000) Airborne occupational allergic contact dermatitis from triglycidyl-p-aminophenol and tetraglycidyl-4,4′-methylene dianiline in preimpregnated epoxy products in the aircraft industry. Dermatology 201:29–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Karlberg AT, Lidén C (1992) Colophony (rosin) in newspapers may contribute to hand eczema. Br J Dermatol 126:161–165CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Kim E, Maibach H (2003) Changing paradigms in dermatology: science and art of diagnostic patch and contact urticaria testing. Clin Dermatol 21:346–352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Koch P, Brehler R, Eck E, Geier J, Hillen U, Peters K-P, Rakoski J, Rothe A, Schnuch A, Szliska C, Uter W (2002) Berufsspezifische Epikutantestung für Angehörige der Heil- und Pflegeberufe. Derm Beruf Umwelt 50:155–162Google Scholar
  59. Lammintausta K, Zimerson E, Winhoven S, Susitaival P, Hasan T, Gruvberger B, Williams J, Beck M, Bruze M (2010) Sensitization to dimethyl fumarate with multiple concurrent patch test reactions. Contact Dermatitis 62:88–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Le Coz CJ (2006) Clothing. In: Frosch PJ, Menné T, Lepoittevin J-P (eds) Contact dermatitis, 4th edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 679–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lessmann H, Uter W, Geier J, Schnuch A (2006) Die Informations- und Dokumentationsstelle für Kontaktallergien (IDOK) des Informationsverbundes Dermatologischer Kliniken (IVDK). Derm Beruf Umwelt 54:160–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lidén C (2006) Pesticides. In: Frosch PJ, Menné T, Lepoittevin J-P (eds) Contact dermatitis, 4th edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 801–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Menné T, Dooms-Goossens A, Wahlberg JE, White IR, Shaw S (1992) How large a proportion of contact sensitivities are diagnosed with the European standard series? Contact Dermatitis 26:201–202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Mitchell JC (1986) Patch testing to plants. Clin Dermatol 4:77–82CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Nethercott JR (1990) Practical problems in the use of patch testing in the evaluation of patients with contact dermatitis. Curr Probl Dermatol 2:97–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Nettis E, Marcandrea M, Colanardi MC, Paradiso MT, Ferrannini A, Tursi A (2003) Results of standard series patch testing in patients with occupational allergic contact dermatitis. Allergy 58:1304–1307CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Niinimäki A (1987) Scratch-chamber tests in food handler dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 16:11–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Niklasson BJ (1995) Mixing your own antigens. In: Guin JD (ed) Practical contact dermatitis: a handbook for the practitioner. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 63–74Google Scholar
  69. Ormond P, Hazelwood E, Bourke B, Lyons JF, Bourke JF (2002) The importance of a dedicated patch test clinic. Br J Dermatol 146:304–307CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Peiler D, Pflug B, Frosch PJ (2000) Deutsche Kontaktallergie-Gruppe: Empfehlungen für die Epikutantestung von Zahntechnikern. Derm Beruf Umwelt 48:19–20Google Scholar
  71. Proske S, Brehler R, Dickel H, Eck E, Geier J, Hillen U, Koch P, Peters K-P, Rakoski J, Rothe A, Schnuch A, Szliska C, Uter W (2005) Berufsspezifische Epikutantestung in der Altenpflege. Derm Beruf Umwelt 53:50–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rietschel RL, Fowler JF (1995) Fisher’s contact dermatitis, 4th edn. Williams & Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  73. Rietschel RL, Fowler JF (2008) Fisher’s contact dermatitis, 6th edn. BC Dekker, HamiltonGoogle Scholar
  74. Rømyhr O, Nyfors A, Leira HL, Smedbold HT (2006) Allergic contact dermatitis caused by epoxy resin systems in industrial painters. Contact Dermatitis 55:167–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Sasseville D (2009) Dermatitis from plants of the new world. Eur J Dermatol 19:423–430PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Schnuch A, Uter W (2009) Epikutantestung mit der DKG-Standardserie – ein Rückblick. Allergologie 32:262–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Slodownik D, Williams J, Frowen K, Palmer A, Matheson M, Nixon R (2009) The additive value of patch testing with patients’ own products at an occupational dermatology clinic. Contact Dermatitis 61:231–235CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Søsted H, Menné T (2005) Allergy to 3-nitro-p-hydroxyethylaminophenol and 4-amino-3-nitrophenol in a hair dye. Contact Dermatitis 52:317–319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Struwe F, Karger R, Bähr E, Bönsel G, Diepgen TL, Englitz H-G, Koczy-Rensing G, Pappai F, Reinhardt U, Wirtz C, Zoellner G (2005) Epikutantestempfehlungen im Hautarztverfahren für Beschäftigte in metallverarbeitenden Betrieben der Vereinigung der Metall-Berufsgenossenschaften (VMBG). Derm Beruf Umwelt 53:115–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Tiedemann K-H, Zoellner G, Adam M, Becker D, Boveleth W, Eck E, Eckert C, Englitz H-G, Geier J, Koch P, Lessmann H, Müller J, Nöring R, Rocker M, Rothe A, Schmidt A, Schumacher T, Uter W, Warfolomeow I, Wirtz C (2002) Empfehlungen für die Epikutantestung bei Verdacht auf Kontaktallergie durch Kühlschmierstoffe. 2. Hinweise zur Arbeitsstofftestung. Derm Beruf Umwelt 50:180–189Google Scholar
  81. Torralba MC, Tashjian DN, Maibach HI (1999) Occupational contact dermatitis caused by polyfunctional aziridine crosslinker: duct tubing for airconditioning. Contact Dermatitis 41:163CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Uter W, Schnuch A, Geier J, Frosch PJ (1998) Epidemiology of contact dermatitis. The information network of departments of dermatology (IVDK) in Germany. Eur J Dermatol 8:36–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Uter W, Brehler R, Eck E, Geier J, Koch P, Peters K-P, Rakoski J, Rothe A, Schnuch A, Szliska C (1999) Berufsspezifische Epikutantestung bei Friseuren. Empfehlungen der Arbeitsgruppe “Berufs-Testreihen” der Deutschen Kontaktallergie-Gruppe. Derm Beruf Umwelt 47:26–29Google Scholar
  84. Uter W, Balzer C, Geier J, Frosch PJ, Schnuch A (2005) Patch testing with patients’ own cosmetics and toiletries – results of the IVDK, 1998-2002. Contact Dermatitis 53:226–233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Uter W, Geier J, Schnuch A, Frosch PJ (2007) Patch test results with patients’ own perfumes, deodorants and shaving lotions: results of the IVDK 1998–2002. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 21:374–379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Uter W, Rämsch C, Aberer W, Ayala F, Balato A, Beliauskiene A, Fortina AB, Bircher A, Brasch J, Chowdhury MM, Coenraads PJ, Schuttelaar ML, Cooper S, Corradin MT, Elsner P, English JS, Fartasch M, Mahler V, Frosch PJ, Fuchs T, Gawkrodger DJ, Gimènez-Arnau AM, Green CM, Horne HL, Jolanki R, King CM, Krêcisz B, Kiec-Swierczynska M, Ormerod AD, Orton DI, Peserico A, Rantanen T, Rustemeyer T, Sansom JE, Simon D, Statham BN, Wilkinson M, Schnuch A (2009) The European baseline series in 10 European countries, 2005/2006–results of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA). Contact Dermatitis 61:31–38CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. Valks R, Conde-Salazar L, Malfeito J, Ledo S (2005) Contact dermatitis in hairdressers, 10 years later: patch-test results in 300 hairdressers (1994 to 2003) and comparison with previous study. Dermatitis 16:28–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Vigan M (1997) New allergens in cosmetics. Cosmetovigilance. Ann Dermatol Venereol 124: 571–575PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Wahlberg JE (1998) Identification of new allergens and non-irritant patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 39:155–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Wedi B, Hoting E, Koerner M, Kapp A (2000) Allergic contact dermatitis due to monovalent sensitization to the oxidation hair dye intermediate oxamitol (2-aminomethyl-p-aminophenol-2HCl) without cross-sensitivity to haptens of the para-group. Contact Dermatitis 42:104–105PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK)Georg-August-UniversityGoettingenGermany
  2. 2.Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), Department of DermatologyUniversity of GoettingenGoettingenGermany
  3. 3.Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK)University Medical Center GoettingenGoettingenGermany

Personalised recommendations