Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Epidemiology of Contact Dermatitis and Contact Allergy

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Contact Dermatitis

  • 1039 Accesses

Abstract

Contact dermatitis and contact allergy are common medical conditions. But how common are they? Are certain populations, e.g., certain occupations, more affected than others? Are reactions to specific contact allergens more prevalent than to other allergens or more common in a particular subgroup? This chapter presents some basic epidemiologic principles which are important in population-based or clinic-based studies on contact dermatitis. The chapter deals with methodological issues in the analysis of clinical epidemiological studies, i.e., among patients undergoing patch testing. Common pitfalls are addressed, and factors important for the occurrence of contact dermatitis and/or contact allergy are discussed. Examples of studies on contact allergy as well as contact dermatitis in general are presented.

Thomas L. Diepgen: Deceased

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 849.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 999.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Cherry N, Meyer JD, Adisesh A et al (2000) Surveillance of occupational skin disease: EPIDERM and OPRA. Br J Dermatol 142:1128–1134

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Menné T, Borgan O, Green A (1982) Nickel allergy and hand dermatitis in a stratified sample of the Danish female population: an epidemiological study including a statistic appendix. Acta Derm Venereol 62:35–41

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Thyssen JP, Johansen JD, Menné T et al (2009) Nickel allergy in Danish women before and after nickel regulation. N Engl J Med 360:2259–2260

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ahlström MG, Menné T, Thyssen JP, Johansen JD (2017) Nickel allergy in a Danish population 25 years after the first nickel regulation. Contact Derm 76:325–332

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mortz CG, Lauritsen JM, Bindslev-Jensen C, Andersen KE (2002) Contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis in adolescents: prevalence measures and associations. The Odense Adolescence Cohort Study on Atopic Diseases and Dermatitis (TOACS). Acta Derm Venereol 82:352–358

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 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 Derm 58:322–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Funke U, Fartasch M, Diepgen TL (2001) Incidence of work-related hand eczema during apprenticeship: first results of a prospective cohort study in the car industry. Contact Derm 44:166–172

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Josefson A, Färm G, Stymne B, Meding B (2006) Nickel allergy and hand eczema–a 20-year follow up. Contact Derm 55:286–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Nielsen NH, Linneberg A, Menné T et al (2002) Incidence of allergic contact sensitization in Danish adults between 1990 and 1998; the Copenhagen Allergy Study, Denmark. Br J Dermatol 147:487–492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Uter W, Schnuch A, Gefeller O (2004) Guidelines for the descriptive presentation and statistical analysis of contact allergy data. Contact Derm 51:47–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schnuch A, Geier J, Lessmann H et al (2012) Surveillance of contact allergies: methods and results of the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Allergy 67:847–857

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Uter W, Geier J, Lessmann H, Hausen BM (2001) Contact allergy to Disperse Blue 106 and Disperse Blue 124 in German and Austrian patients, 1995 to 1999. Contact Derm 44:173–177

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Uter W, Geier J, Hausen BM (2003) Contact allergy to Disperse Blue 106/124 mix in consecutive German, Austrian and Swiss patients. Contact Derm 48:286–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W et al (1997) National rates and regional differences in sensitization to allergens of the standard series. Population-adjusted frequencies of sensitization (PAFS) in 40,000 patients from a multicenter study (IVDK). Contact Derm 37:200–209

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Uter W, Schnuch A, Wilkinson M et al (2016) Registries in clinical epidemiology: the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA). Methods Inf Med 55:193–199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Andersen KE, Veien NK (1985) Biocide patch tests. Contact Derm 12:99–103

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Uter W, Schwitulla J, Thyssen JP et al (2011) The ‘overall yield’ with the baseline series - a useful addition to the array of MOAHLFA factors describing departmental characteristics of patch tested patients. Contact Derm 65:322–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Uter W, Ludwig A, Balda BR et al (2004) The prevalence of contact allergy differed between population-based and clinic-based data. J Clin Epidemiol 57:627–632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gefeller O, Pfahlberg AB, Uter W (2013) What can be learnt from nothing? – a statistical perspective. Contact Derm 69:350–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schnuch A, Uter W (2003) Decrease in nickel allergy in Germany and regulatory interventions. Contact Derm 49:107–108

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Gefeller O, Pfahlberg A, Geier J et al (1999) The association between size of test chamber and patch test reaction: a statistical reanalysis. Contact Derm 40:14–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Dickel H, Bruckner TM, Schmidt A, Diepgen TL (2003) Impact of atopic skin diathesis on occupational skin disease incidence in a working population. J Invest Dermatol 121:37–40

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schäfer T, Böhler E, Ruhdorfer S et al (2001) Epidemiology of contact allergy in adults. Allergy 56:1192–1196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schnuch A, Uter W, Geier J, Gefeller O (2002) Epidemiology of contact allergy: an estimation of morbidity employing the clinical epidemiology and drug-utilization research (CE-DUR) approach. Contact Derm 47:32–39

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Diepgen TL, Coenraads PJ (2000) Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of patch testing: the more you test, the more you get? ESCD Working Party on Epidemiology. Contact Derm 42:315–317

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Grattan CE, English JS, Foulds IS, Rycroft RJ (1989) Cutting fluid dermatitis. Contact Derm 20:372–376

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Smit HA, Coenraads PJ, Lavrijsen AP, Nater JP (1992) Evaluation of a self-administered questionnaire on hand dermatitis. Contact Derm 26:11–16

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Vermeulen R, Kromhout H, Bruynzeel DP, de Boer EM (2000) Ascertainment of hand dermatitis using a symptom-based questionnaire; applicability in an industrial population. Contact Derm 42:202–206

    Google Scholar 

  29. Berg M, Axelson O (1990) Evaluation of a questionnaire for facial skin complaints related to work at visual display units. Contact Derm 22:71–77

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Susitaival P, Husman L, Hollmen A, Horsmanheimo M (1995) Dermatoses determined in a population of farmers in a questionnaire-based clinical study including methodology validation. Scand J Work Environ Health 21:30–35

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Svensson Å, Lindberg M, Meding B et al (2002) Self-reported hand eczema: symptom-based reports do not increase the validity of diagnosis. Br J Dermatol 147:281–284

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Susitaival P, Flyvholm MA, Meding B et al (2003) Nordic Occupational Skin Questionnaire (NOSQ-2002): a new tool for surveying occupational skin diseases and exposure. Contact Derm 49:70–76

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Warshaw EM, Buchholz HJ, Belsito DV et al (2009) Allergic patch test reactions associated with cosmetics: retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2001–2004. J Am Acad Dermatol 60:23–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wilkinson JD, Shaw S, Andersen KE et al (2002) Monitoring levels of preservative sensitivity in Europe. A 10-year overview (1991–2000). Contact Derm 46:207–210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Uter W, Gefeller O, Giménez-Arnau A et al (2015) Characteristics of patients patch tested in the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) network, 2009–2012. Contact Derm 73:82–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Pesonen M, Jolanki R, Larese Filon F et al (2015) Patch test results of the European baseline series among patients with occupational contact dermatitis across Europe - analyses of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergy network, 2002–2010. Contact Derm 72:154–163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Thyssen JP, Uter W, Schnuch A et al (2007) 10-year prevalence of contact allergy in the general population in Denmark estimated through the CE-DUR method. Contact Derm 57:265–272

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Nielsen NH, Linneberg A, Menné T et al (2001) Persistence of contact allergy among Danish adults: an 8-year follow-up study. Contact Derm 45:350–353

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Menné T et al (2009) The prevalence and morbidity of sensitization to fragrance mix I in the general population. Br J Dermatol 161:95–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Mortz CG, Lauritsen JM, Bindslev-Jensen C, Andersen KE (2001) Prevalence of atopic dermatitis, asthma, allergic rhinitis, and hand and contact dermatitis in adolescents. The Odense Adolescence Cohort Study on Atopic Diseases and Dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 144:523–532

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Nielsen NH, Linneberg A, Menné T et al (2001) Allergic contact sensitization in an adult Danish population: two cross-sectional surveys eight years apart (the Copenhagen Allergy Study). Acta Derm Venereol 81:31–34

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Meding B, Järvholm B (2002) Hand eczema in Swedish adults – changes in prevalence between 1983 and 1996. J Invest Dermatol 118:719–723

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Søsted H, Hesse U, Menné T et al (2005) Contact dermatitis to hair dyes in a Danish adult population: an interview-based study. Br J Dermatol 153:132–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Lerbaek A, Kyvik KO, Ravn H et al (2007) Incidence of hand eczema in a population-based twin cohort: genetic and environmental risk factors. Br J Dermatol 157:552–557

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Dotterud LK, Smith-Sivertsen T (2007) Allergic contact sensitization in the general adult population: a population-based study from Northern Norway. Contact Derm 56:10–15

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Lagrelius M, Wahlgren CF, Matura M et al (2016) High prevalence of contact allergy in adolescence: results from the population-based BAMSE birth cohort. Contact Derm 74:44–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Diepgen TL, Ofenloch RF, Bruze M et al (2016) Prevalence of contact allergy in the general population in different European regions. Br J Dermatol 174:319–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Naldi L, Cazzaniga S, Gonçalo M et al (2014) Prevalence of self-reported skin complaints and avoidance of common daily life consumer products in selected European regions. JAMA Dermatol 150:154–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Meding B, Järvholm B (2016) Comments on ‘prevalence of contact allergy in the general population in different European regions’ and ‘prevalence of fragrance contact allergy in the general population of five European countries: a cross-sectional study’. Br J Dermatol 175:642

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Lantinga H, Nater JP, Coenraads PJ (1984) Prevalence, incidence and course of eczema on the hands and forearms in a sample of the general population. Contact Derm 10:135–139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Smit HA, Burdorf A, Coenraads PJ (1993) Prevalence of hand dermatitis in different occupations. Int J Epidemiol 22:288–293

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Meding B, Swanbeck G (1987) Prevalence of hand eczema in an industrial city. Br J Dermatol 116:627–634

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Rea JN, Newhouse ML, Halil T (1976) Skin disease in Lambeth. A community study of prevalence and use of medical care. Br J Prev Soc Med 30:107–114

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Johnson MT, Roberts J (1978) Skin conditions and related need for medical care among persons 1–74 years. United States, 1971–1974. Vital Health Stat 11:1–72

    Google Scholar 

  55. Kavli G, Førde OH (1984) Hand dermatoses in Tromsø. Contact Derm 10:174–177

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Coenraads PJ, Nater JP, van der Lende R (1983) Prevalence of eczema and other dermatoses of the hands and arms in the Netherlands. Association with age and occupation. Clin Exp Dermatol 8:495–503

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Varigos GA, Dunt DR (1981) Occupational dermatitis. An epidemiological study in the rubber and cement industries. Contact Derm 7:105–110

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Menné T, Christophersen J, Maibach HI (1987) Epidemiology of allergic contact sensitization. Monogr Allergy 21:132–161

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Alinaghi F, Bennike NH, Egeberg A et al (2019) Prevalence of contact allergy in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Contact Derm 80:77–85

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Nielsen NH, Menne T (1992) Allergic contact sensitization in an unselected Danish population. The Glostrup Allergy Study, Denmark. Acta Derm Venereol 72:456–460

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Menné T et al (2009) The association between hand eczema and nickel allergy has weakened among young women in the general population following the Danish nickel regulation: results from two cross-sectional studies. Contact Derm 61:342–348

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Kręcisz B, Chomiczewska D, Palczyński C, Kieć-Świerczyńska M (2012) Contact allergy to metals in adolescents: nickel release from metal accessories 7 years after the implementation of the EU Nickel Directive in Poland. Contact Derm 67:270–276

    Google Scholar 

  63. Mortz CG, Bindslev-Jensen C, Andersen KE (2013) Prevalence, incidence rates and persistence of contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis in The Odense Adolescence Cohort Study: a 15-year follow-up. Br J Dermatol 168:318–325

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Dickel H, Bruckner T, Bernhard-Klimt C et al (2002) Surveillance scheme for occupational skin disease in the Saarland, FRG. First report from BKH-S. Contact Derm 46:197–206

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Halkier-Sørensen L (1996) Occupational skin diseases. Contact Derm 35:1–120

    Google Scholar 

  66. Kanerva L, Toikkanen J, Jolanki R, Estlander T (1996) Statistical data on occupational contact urticaria. Contact Derm 35:229–233

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Mahler V, Aalto-Korte K, Alfonso JH et al (2017) Occupational skin diseases: actual state analysis of patient management pathways in 28 European countries. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 31(Suppl 4):12–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Montgomery RL, Agius R, Wilkinson SM, Carder M (2018) UK trends of allergic occupational skin disease attributed to fragrances 1996–2015. Contact Derm 78:33–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Warburton KL, Urwin R, Carder M et al (2015) UK rates of occupational skin disease attributed to rubber accelerators, 1996–2012. Contact Derm 72:305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Meyer JD, Chen Y, Holt DL et al (2000) Occupational contact dermatitis in the UK: a surveillance report from EPIDERM and OPRA. Occup Med (Lond) 50:265–273

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Dickel H, Kuss O, Blesius CR et al (2001) Occupational skin diseases in Northern Bavaria between 1990 and 1999: a population-based study. Br J Dermatol 145:453–462

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Bock M, Schmidt A, Bruckner T, Diepgen TL (2003) Occupational skin disease in the construction industry. Br J Dermatol 149:1165–1171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Tacke J, Schmidt A, Fartasch M, Diepgen TL (1995) Occupational contact dermatitis in bakers, confectioners and cooks. A population-based study. Contact Derm 33:112–117

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Dickel H, Kuss O, Schmidt A et al (2002) Importance of irritant contact dermatitis in occupational skin disease. Am J Clin Dermatol 3:283–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Dickel H, Kuss O, Schmidt A, Diepgen TL (2002) Impact of preventive strategies on trend of occupational skin disease in hairdressers: population based register study. BMJ 324:1422–1423

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Avnstorp C (1989) Follow-up of workers from the prefabricated concrete industry after the addition of ferrous sulphate to Danish cement. Contact Derm 20:365–371

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Geier J, Krautheim A, Uter W et al (2011) Occupational contact allergy in the building trade in Germany: influence of preventive measures and changing exposure. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 84:403–411

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Stocks SJ, McNamee R, Turner S et al (2012) Has European Union legislation to reduce exposure to chromate in cement been effective in reducing the incidence of allergic contact dermatitis attributed to chromate in the UK? Occup Environ Med 69:150–152

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Uter W, Pfahlberg A, Gefeller O, Schwanitz HJ (1998) Prevalence and incidence of hand dermatitis in hairdressing apprentices: results of the POSH study. Prevention of occupational skin disease in hairdressers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 71:487–492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Lind ML, Albin M, Brisman J et al (2007) Incidence of hand eczema in female Swedish hairdressers. Occup Environ Med 64:191–195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Rönsch H, Apfelbacher C, Brans R et al (2019) Which outcomes have been measured in hand eczema trials? A systematic review. Contact Derm 80:201–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Uter W, Gefeller O, Schwanitz HJ (1998) An epidemiological study of the influence of season (cold and dry air) on the occurrence of irritant skin changes of the hands. Br J Dermatol 138:266–272

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Charman C, Chambers C, Williams H (2003) Measuring atopic dermatitis severity in randomized controlled clinical trials: what exactly are we measuring? J Invest Dermatol 120:932–941

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Coenraads PJ, Diepgen TL (1998) Risk for hand eczema in employees with past or present atopic dermatitis. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 71:7–13

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Nilsson E, Mikaelsson B, Andersson S (1985) Atopy, occupation and domestic work as risk factors for hand eczema in hospital workers. Contact Derm 13:216–223

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Visser MJ, Landeck L, Campbell LE et al (2013) Impact of atopic dermatitis and loss-of-function mutations in the filaggrin gene on the development of occupational irritant contact dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 168:326–332

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Visser MJ, Verberk MM, Campbell LE et al (2014) Filaggrin loss-of-function mutations and atopic dermatitis as risk factors for hand eczema in apprentice nurses: part II of a prospective cohort study. Contact Derm 70:139–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Heede NG, Thuesen BH, Thyssen JP et al (2017) Hand eczema, atopic dermatitis and filaggrin mutations in adult Danes: a registry-based study assessing risk of disability pension. Contact Derm 77:95–105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Rystedt I (1985) Hand eczema and long-term prognosis in atopic dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 117:1–59

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Smit HA, van Rijssen A, Vandenbroucke JP, Coenraads PJ (1994) Susceptibility to and incidence of hand dermatitis in a cohort of apprentice hairdressers and nurses. Scand J Work Environ Health 20:113–121

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Josefson A, Färm G, Magnuson A, Meding B (2009) Nickel allergy as risk factor for hand eczema: a population-based study. Br J Dermatol 160:828–834

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Bryld LE, Hindsberger C, Kyvik KO et al (2004) Genetic factors in nickel allergy evaluated in a population-based female twin sample. J Invest Dermatol 123:1025–1029

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Lerbaek A, Kyvik KO, Mortensen J et al (2007) Heritability of hand eczema is not explained by comorbidity with atopic dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol 127:1632–1640

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. No authors listed (2016) Methylisothiazolinone, quo vadis? Contact Derm 75:263–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Urwin R, Craig S, Latheef F, Wilkinson M (2017) Methylisothiazolinone: the epidemic is declining - but not gone. Contact Derm 76:301–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany

    Wolfgang Uter

  2. Department of Clinical Social Medicine, Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Thomas L. Diepgen

Authors
  1. Wolfgang Uter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas L. Diepgen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wolfgang Uter .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Dermatology and Allergy National Allergy Research Centre Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Hellerup, Denmark

    Jeanne Duus Johansen

  2. Division of Allergology, Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany

    Vera Mahler

  3. Laboratoire de Dermatochimie, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France

    Jean-Pierre Lepoittevin

  4. Professor emeritus Formerly Department of Dermatology, Klinikum Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany

    Peter J. Frosch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Uter, W., Diepgen, T.L. (2021). Epidemiology of Contact Dermatitis and Contact Allergy. In: Johansen, J.D., Mahler, V., Lepoittevin, JP., Frosch, P.J. (eds) Contact Dermatitis. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36335-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36335-2_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-36334-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-36335-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineReference Module Medicine

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation