Premium
Systematic review on skin adverse effects of important hazardous hair cosmetic ingredients with a focus on hairdressers
Author(s) -
Uter Wolfgang,
Strahwald Julia,
Hallmann Sarah,
Johansen Jeanne D.,
Havmose Martin S.,
Kezic Sanja,
Molen Henk F.,
Macan Jelena,
Babić Željka,
Franić Zrinka,
Macan Marija,
Turk Rajka,
Symanzik Cara,
Weinert Patricia,
John Swen M.
Publication year - 2023
Publication title -
contact dermatitis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.524
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1600-0536
pISSN - 0105-1873
DOI - 10.1111/cod.14236
Subject(s) - medicine , cosmetics , dermatology , allergy , contact allergy , relative risk , allergic contact dermatitis , hair dyes , contact dermatitis , ammonium persulfate , immunology , confidence interval , pathology , organic chemistry , chemistry , dyeing , polymerization , polymer
Background The burden of occupational hand eczema in hairdressers is high, and (partly strong) allergens abound in the hair cosmetic products they use. Objectives To systematically review published evidence concerning contact allergy to an indicative list of active ingredients of hair cosmetics, namely, p ‐phenylenediamine (PPD), toluene‐2,5‐diamine (PTD), persulfates, mostly ammonium persulfate (APS), glyceryl thioglycolate (GMTG), and ammonium thioglycolate (ATG), concerning the prevalence of sensitization, particularly in terms of a comparison (relative risk; RR) between hairdressers and non‐hairdressers. Methods Following a PROSPERO‐registered and published protocol, eligible literature published from 2000 to February 2021 was identified, yielding 322 publications, and extracted in standardized publication record forms, also considering risk of bias. Results Based on 141 publications, the contact allergy prevalence to PPD was 4.3% (95% CI: 3.8–4.9%) in consecutively patch tested patients. Other ingredients were mostly tested in an aimed fashion, yielding variable, and partly high contact allergy prevalences. Where possible, the RR was calculated, yielding an average increased sensitization risk in hairdressers of between 5.4 (PPD) and 3.4 (ATG). Additional evidence related to immediate‐type hypersensitivity, experimental results, exposures, and information from case reports was qualitatively synthesized. Conclusions An excess risk of contact allergy is clearly evident from the pooled published evidence from the last 20 years. This should prompt an improvement in working conditions and product safety.