Prognosis of Occupational Contact Dermatitis

  • Anthony Teik Jin Goon
  • Chee Leok GohEmail author
Reference work entry


Factors that may affect the prognosis of occupational contact dermatitis include atopy, job change, the age of the patient, the nature of irritants and allergens, and the nature of the occupation.

Epidemiology studies in the 1970s and 1980s generally reported the persistence of dermatitis among patients who develop occupational contact dermatitis, but recent reports appear to indicate that the prognosis is better than previously thought.

Most studies indicated that there is no significant sex difference in the prognosis of occupational contact dermatitis.

Patients younger than 25 years fared clearly better than older groups.

Most reports indicate that irritant contact dermatitis tends to have a poorer prognosis than allergic contact dermatitis. Some occupational irritants – for example, cutting fluids – are more likely to lead to chronicity than others.

Workers who change their job tend to have better outcomes than those who do not change jobs.

A personal history of atopy appears to have poorer prognosis.

The causes of chronicity from occupational contact dermatitis are usually multifactorial.


Prognosis Outcome Occupational Dermatoses Contact Dermatitis 


  1. Agrup G (1969) Hand eczema and other hand dermatoses in South Sweden. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 49:61Google Scholar
  2. Apfelbacher CJ, Radulescu M, Diepgen TL, Funke U (2008) Occurrence and prognosis of hand eczema in the car industry: results from the PACO follow-up study (PACO II). Contact Dermatitis 58:322–329Google Scholar
  3. Apfelbacher CJ, Soder S, Diepgen TL, Weisshaar E (2009) The impact of measures for secondary individual prevention of work-related skin diseases in health care workers: 1-year follow-up study. Contact Dermatitis 60:144–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Avnstorp C (1989) Follow-up of workers from the prefabricated concrete industry after the addition of ferrous sulphate to Danish cement. Contact Dermatitis 20:365–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brans R, Skudlik C, Weisshaar E, Gediga K, Scheidt R, Wulfhorst B, Elsner P, Schönfeld M, John SM, Diepgen TL (2014) Association between tobacco smoking and prognosis of occupational hand eczema: a prospective cohort study. Br J Dermatol 171:1108–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brans R, Skudlik C, Weisshaar E, Scheidt R, Orenloch R, Elsner P, Wulfhorst B, Schönfeld M, John SM, Diepgen TL (2016) Multicentre cohort study ‘rehabilitation of occupational skin diseases – optimization and quality Assurance of Inpatient Management (ROQ)’: results from a 3-year follow-up. Contact Dermatitis 75:205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burrows D (1972) Prognosis in industrial dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 87:145–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chia SE, Goh CL (1991) Prognosis of occupational dermatitis in Singapore worker. Am J Contact Dermat 2:105–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Christensen OB (1982) Prognosis in nickel allergy and hand eczema. Contact Dermatitis 8:7–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clemmensen KBB, Carøe TK, Thomsen SF, Ebbehøj NE, Agner T (2014) Two-year follow-up survey of patients with allergic contact dermatitis from an occupational cohort: is the prognosis dependent on the omnipresence of the allergen? Br J Dermatol 170:1100–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coenraads PJ (1983) Prevalence of hand eczema. Association with occupational exposure, especially in construction workers, M.D. thesis. University of Groningen, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  12. Cvetkovski RS, Zachariae R, Jensen H, Olsen J, Johansen JD, Agner T (2006) Prognosis of occupational hand eczema: a follow-up study. Arch Dermatol 142:305–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fregert S (1975) Occupational dermatitis in a 10-year material. Contact Dermatitis 1:96–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goh CL, Gan SL (1996) Change in cement manufacturing process, a cause for decline in chromate allergy? Contact Dermatitis 34:51–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Halbert AR, Gebauer KA, Wall LM (1992) Prognosis of occupational chromate dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 27:214–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hellier FF (1958) The prognosis in industrial dermatitis. BMJ 1:196–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keczkes K, Bhate SM, Wyatt EH (1983) The outcome of primary irritant hand dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 109:665–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kütting B, Baumeister T, Weistenhöfer W, Pfahlberg A, Uter W, Drexler H (2010) Effectiveness of skin protection measures in prevention of occupational hand eczema: results of a prospective randomized controlled trial over a follow-up period of 1 year. Br J Dermatol 162:362–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lips R, Rast H, Eisner P (1996) Outcome of job change in patients with occupational chromate dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 34:268–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mälkönen T, Jolanki R, Alanko K, Luukkonen R, Aalto-Korte K, Lauerma A, Susitaival P (2009) A 6-month follow-up study of 1048 patients diagnosed with an occupational skin disease. Contact Dermatitis 61:261–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mälkönen T, Alanko K, Jolanki R, Luukkonen R, Aalto-Korte K, Lauerma A, Susitaival P (2010) Long-term follow-up study of occupational hand eczema. Br J Dermatol 163:999–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Matsunaga K, Hosokawa K, Suzuki M, Arima Y, Hayakawa R (1998) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis in beautician. Contact Dermatitis 18:94–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Meding B, Wrangsjö K, Järvholm B (2005) Fifteen-year follow-up of hand eczema: persistence and consequences. Br J Dermatol 152:975–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nethercott J, Holness L (1994) Disease outcome in workers with occupational skin disease. J Am Acad Dermatol 30:569–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pryce DW, Irvine D, English JSC et al (1989) Soluble oil dermatitis: a follow-up study. Contact Dermatitis 21:28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosen RH, Freeman S (1993) Prognosis of occupational contact dermatitis in New South Wales, Australia. Contact Dermatitis 29:88–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rystedt I (1985) Hand eczema and long-term prognosis in atopic dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 117:1–59Google Scholar
  28. Schubert H, Berova N, Czernielewski A et al (1987) Epidemiology of nickel allergy. Contact Dermatitis 16:122–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shah M, Lewis FM, Gawkrodger DJ (1996) Prognosis of occupational hand dermatitis in metalworkers. Contact Dermatitis 34:27–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Skog E, Tottie M (1961) Occupational eczema causing disablement. Acta Derm Venereol 41:205–212Google Scholar
  31. Weisshaar E, Skudlik C, Scheidt R, Matterne U, Wulfhorst B, Schönfeld M, Elsner P, Diepgen TL, John SM (2013) Multicentre study ‘rehabilitation of occupational skin diseases – optimization and quality assurance of inpatient management (ROQ)’ – results from 12-month follow-up. Contact Dermatitis 68:169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Williamson KS (1967) A prognostic study of occupational dermatitis cases in a chemical works. Br J Ind Med 24:103–113PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Skin CentreSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations