Hand eczema among Dutch beekeepers – a cross‐sectional study

Summary Background and objectives Studies of beekeepers have mostly focused on contact allergy to propolis. The overall prevalence of hand eczema (HE) in beekeepers has not been studied. Our objectives were to gain insight into the prevalence of HE in the Dutch beekeeper population; to define the im...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft 2019-02, Vol.17 (2), p.158-166
Hauptverfasser: Oosterhaven, Jart A. F., Verbist, Julia, Schuttelaar, Marie‐Louise A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Summary Background and objectives Studies of beekeepers have mostly focused on contact allergy to propolis. The overall prevalence of hand eczema (HE) in beekeepers has not been studied. Our objectives were to gain insight into the prevalence of HE in the Dutch beekeeper population; to define the impact of beekeeping activities on HE and vice versa; and to determine associated factors. Patients and methods We used a cross‐sectional online survey. Dutch beekeepers answered questions on beekeeping activities, the prevalence and characteristics of HE, including severity, and the impact of the disease on beekeeping. Results We analyzed 833 surveys (12 % of Dutch beekeepers). The one‐year prevalence of HE was 13.2 %, and the lifetime prevalence was 20.5 %. In 28 patch‐tested beekeepers with hand eczema, eight (28.6 %) were allergic to propolis. Atopic dermatitis was the only variable associated with HE: the odds ratio was 4.53 (95 % confidence interval 2.78–7.38). One in three beekeepers reported that HE was caused or worsened by beekeeping, although only 3.8 % reported working less at beekeeping because of HE, and the impact of HE on beekeeping activities (as perceived by beekeepers) is low. Conclusions In this sample of Dutch beekeepers, hand eczema was more prevalent than in the general population, but seems to have had little impact on the beekeeping activities of the majority of beekeepers.
ISSN:1610-0379
1610-0387
DOI:10.1111/ddg.13754