Prevention in Health-Care Professionals

  • Lilla LandeckEmail author
  • Britta Wulfhorst
  • Swen Malte John
Reference work entry


Job-related hazards for the development of skin diseases in health care professionals are prolonged wet work, contact to potential allergens as well as infectious agents, and the exposure to ionizing radiation. Most common skin diseases resulting comprise irritant/allergic contact dermatitis, infections, and skin cancer/radiodermatitis.

To avoid irritant contact dermatitis, use protective (barrier) creams and moisturizers.

Infections can be prevented by hand hygiene, including hand washing and/or disinfection, and the use of medical gloves.

Hand disinfection is eudermic and should be the preferred method of hand hygiene.

Medical gloves should protect against microorganisms and chemicals. Gloves used in the medical sector have to achieve at least an acceptance quality level (AQL) of 1.5.

For prevention of skin cancer due to ionizing radiation, a continual dose monitoring, annual medical examinations, and rigorous approach to radiation protection and dose reduction are necessary.


Prevention Health-care-professionals Contact dermatitis Infectious diseases Skin cancer 


  1. Aalto-Korte K, Ackermann L, Henriks-Eckerman ML, Välimaa J, Reinikka-Railo H, Leppänen E, Jolanki R (2007) 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one in disposable polyvinyl chloride gloves for medical use. Contact Dermatitis 57:365–370Google Scholar
  2. Allmers H, Schmengler J, John SM (2004) Decreasing incidence of occupational contact urticaria caused by natural rubber latex allergy in German health care workers. J Allergy Clin Immunol 114:347–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM (2009a) F1383 standard test method for resistance of protective clothing materials to permeation by liquids or gases under conditions of intermittant contact. In: ASTM annual book of ASTM standards, vol 11.03.
  4. American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM (2009b) F739 standard test method for resistance of protective clothing materials to permeation by liquids or gases under conditions of continous contact. In: ASTM annual book of ASTM standards, vol 11.03.
  5. American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM (2009c) F903 standard test method for resistance of protective clothing materials to penetration by liquids. In: ASTM annual book of ASTM standards, vol 11.03.
  6. Bhargava K, White IR, White JM (2009) Thiuram patch test positivity 1980–2006: incidence is now falling. Contact Dermatitis 60:222–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caillot JL, Côte C, Abidi H, Fabry J (1999) Electronic evaluation of the value of double gloving. Br J Surg 86:1387–1390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. CEN – EN 374 I-III (2003) Protective gloves against chemicals and micro-organisms. Part I: terminology and performance requirements, part II: determination of resistance for penetration, part III: determination of resistance to permeation by chemicals. Comité Européen de Normalisation, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  9. CEN – EN 455 I-III (2002) Medical gloves for single use. Part I: requirements for testing for freedom from holes, part II: requirements and testing for physical properties, part III: requirements and testing for biological evaluation. Comité Européen de Normalisation, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  10. Council Directive 76/768/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products. Accessed 21 Dec 2010
  11. Cousins C, Sharp C (2004) Medical interventional procedures-reducing the radiation risks. Clin Radiol 59:468–473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. European Commission (1999) Scientific committee on cosmetic products and non-food products intended for consumers. Opinion concerning fragrance allergy in consumers. Accessed 12 Dec 2010
  13. European Commission: Directive 89/686/EEC for Personal protective equipment (PPE) (2016) Protective gloves against dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms – part 1: terminology and performance requirements for chemical risks. EN ISO 374-1:2016. Accessed 10 June 2017
  14. Geier J, Lessmann H, Uter W, Schnuch A, Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) (2003) Occupational rubber glove allergy: results of the information network of departments of dermatology (IVDK), 1995–2001. Contact Dermatitis 48:39–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hamann CP, Rodgers PA, Sullivan KM (2005) Management of natural rubber glove sensitivity. In: Boman A, Estlander T, Wahlberg JE, Maibach HI (eds) Protective gloves for occupational use. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 155–186Google Scholar
  16. Hugonnet S, Pittet D (2000) Hand hygiene-beliefs or science? Clin Microbiol Infect 6:350–356PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson DR, Kyriou J, Morton EJ, Clifton A, Fitzgerald M, Macsweeney E (2001) Radiation protection in interventional radiology. Clin Radiol 56:99–106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kampf G, Kramer A (2004) Epidemiologic background of hand hygiene and evaluation of the most important agents for scrubs and rubs. Clin Microbiol Rev 17:863–893PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kampf G, Löffler H (2007) Prevention of irritant contact dermatitis among health care workers by using evidence-based hand hygiene practices: a review. Ind Health 45:645–652PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Katz JD (2004) Hand washing and hand disinfection: more than your mother taught you. Anesthesiol Clin North Am 22:457–471PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kerr LN, Chaput MP, Cash LD, O’Malley LG, Sarhrani EM, Teixeira JC, Boivin WS, Mailhot SA (2004) Assessment of the durability of medical examination gloves. J Occup Environ Hyg 1:607–612PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Knudsen B, Lerbaek A, Johansen JD, Menné T (2006) Reduction in the frequency of sensitization to thiurams. A result of legislation? Contact Dermatitis 54:170–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kresken J, Klotz A (2003) Occupational skin-protection products–a review. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 76:355–358CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Liss GM, Sussman GL (1999) Latex sensitization: occupational versus general population prevalence rates. Am J Ind Med 35:196–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liss GM, Sussman GL, Deal K, Brown S, Cividino M, Siu S, Beezhold DH, Smith G, Swanson MC, Yunginger J, Douglas A, Holness DL, Lebert P, Keith P, Wasserman S, Turjanmaa K (1997) Latex allergy: epidemiological study of 1351 hospital workers. Occup Environ Med 54:335–342PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lübbe J, Ruffieux C, Perrenoud D (2000) A stinging cause for preventive skin care. Lancet 356:768–769PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Magnano M, Silvani S, Vincenzi C, Nino M, Tosti A (2009) Contact allergens and irritants in household washing and cleaning products. Contact Dermatitis 61:337–341CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Mellström GA, Boman A (2006) Protective gloves. In: Chew A-L, Maibach H (eds) Irritant dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, pp 409–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Naver LP, Gottrup F (2000) Incidence of glove perforations in gastrointestinal surgery and the protective effect of double gloves: a prospective, randomised controlled study. Eur J Surg 166:293–295PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nedorost S (2009) Clinical patterns of hand and foot dermatitis: emphasis on rubber and chromate allergens. Dermatol Clin 27:281–287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Panizzon RG, Goldschmidt H (1991) Radiation reactions and sequelae. In: Goldschmidt H, Panizzon RG (eds) Modern dermatologic radiation therapy. Springer, New York, pp 25–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pontén A (2006) Formaldehyde in reusable protective gloves. Contact Dermatitis 54:268–271PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rabussay DP, Korniewicz DM (1997) Improving glove barrier effectiveness. AORN J 66:1043–1046, 1049–1054, 1057–1060PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rego A, Roley L (1999) In-use barrier integrity of gloves: latex and nitrile superior to vinyl. Am J Infect Control 27:405–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reunala T, Alenius H, Turjanmaa K, Palosuo T (2004) Latex allergy and skin. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 4:397–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schäfer P, Bewick-Sonntag C, Capri MG, Berardesca E (2002) Physiological changes in skin barrier function in relation to occlusion level, exposure time and climatic conditions. Skin Pharmacol Appl Ski Physiol 15:7–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schnuch A, Uter W, Geier J, Frosch PJ, Rustemeyer T (1998) Contact allergies in healthcare workers. Results from the IVDK. Acta Derm Venereol 78:358–363PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Semmelweis I (1988) The etiolology, concept and prophylaxis of childbed fever. In: Buck C, Llopis A, Najera E, Terris M (eds) The challenge of epidemiology- issues and selected readings. PAHO Scientific, Washington, DC, pp 46–59Google Scholar
  39. Smit HA, Burdorf A, Coenraads PJ (1993) Prevalence of hand dermatitis in different occupations. Int J Epidemiol 22:288–293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sommer S, Wilkinson SM, Beck MH, English JS, Gawkrodger DJ, Green C (2002) Type IV hypersensitivity reactions to natural rubber latex: results of a multicentre study. Br J Dermatol 146:114–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stutz N, Becker D, Jappe U, John SM, Ladwig A, Spornraft-Ragaller P, Uter W, Löffler H (2009) Nurses’ perception of the benefits and adverse effects of hand disinfection: alcohol-based hand rubs versus hygienic handwashing – a multicentre questionnaire study with additional patch testing by the German contact dermatitis research group (DKG). Br J Dermatol 160:565–572PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Suneja T, Belsito DV (2008) Occupational dermatoses in health care workers evaluated for suspected allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 58:285–290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tanner J, Parkinson H (2006) Double gloving to reduce surgical cross-infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD003087Google Scholar
  44. Thomas S, Agarwal M, Mehta G (2001) Intraoperative glove perforation–single versus double gloving in protection against skin contamination. Postgrad Med J 77:458–460PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Thyssen JP, Johansen JD, Linneberg A, Menné T (2010) The epidemiology of hand eczema in the general population–prevalence and main findings. Contact Dermatitis 62:75–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Toraason M, Sussman G, Biagini R, Meade J, Beezhold D, Germolec D (2000) Latex allergy in the workplace. Toxicol Sci 58:5–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wagner LK, Eifel PJ, Geise RA (1994) Potential biological effects following high X-ray dose interventional procedures. J Vasc Interv Radiol 5:71–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Warshaw EM, Schram SE, Maibach HI, Belsito DV, Marks JG Jr, Fowler JF Jr, Rietschel RL, Taylor JS, Mathias CG, DeLeo VA, Zug KA, Sasseville D, Storrs FJ, Pratt MD (2008) Occupation-related contact dermatitis in North American health care workers referred for patch testing: cross-sectional data, 1998 to 2004. Dermatitis 19:261–274PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wetzky U, Bock M, Wulfhorst B, John SM (2009) Short- and long-term effects of single and repetitive glove occlusion on the epidermal barrier. Arch Dermatol Res 301:595–602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilkinson SM, Beck MH (1996) Allergic contact dermatitis from latex rubber. Br J Dermatol 134:910–914PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wulfhorst B, Bock M, Skudlik C, Wigger-Alberti W, John SM (2011) Prevention of hand dermatitis – gloves, barrier creams and workers’ education. In: Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin JP (eds) Contact dermatitis, 5th edn. Springer, Berlin, pp 985–1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yazar K, Johnsson S, Lind ML, Boman A, Lidén C (2011) Preservatives and fragrances in selected consumer-available cosmetics and detergents. Contact Dermatitis 64:265–272CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhai H, Maibach HI (2001) Skin occlusion and irritant and allergic contact dermatitis: an overview. Contact Dermatitis 44:201–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lilla Landeck
    • 1
    Email author
  • Britta Wulfhorst
    • 2
  • Swen Malte John
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of DermatologyErnst von Bergmann General HospitalPotsdamGermany
  2. 2.MSH Medical School HamburgUniversity of Applied Sciences and Medical UniversityHamburgGermany
  3. 3.Department of Dermatology, Environmental Medicine and Health TheoryUniversity of OsnabrückOsnabrückGermany

Personalised recommendations