key: cord-0912186-nrtc38l7 authors: Proietti, Ilaria; Borrelli, Ivan; Skroza, Nevena; Santoro, Paolo Emilio; Gualano, Maria Rosaria; Bernardini, Nicoletta; Mambrin, Alessandra; Tolino, Ersilia; Marchesiello, Anna; Marraffa, Federica; Michelini, Simone; Rossi, Giovanni; Volpe, Salvatore; Ricciardi, Walter; Moscato, Umberto; Potenza, Concetta title: Adverse skin reactions to personal protective equipment during COVID‐19 pandemic in Italian health care workers date: 2022-03-23 journal: Dermatol Ther DOI: 10.1111/dth.15460 sha: f8753112cf0c85790eb50e3ae0436376193418bb doc_id: 912186 cord_uid: nrtc38l7 To avoid exposure to SARS‐COV‐2, healthcare professionals must use personal protective equipment (PPE). Their use has been related to a series of adverse effects; the most frequent adverse events were headache, dyspnoea, and pressure injuries. Skin adverse effects are very common, including contact dermatitis, itching, erythema, and acneiform eruptions. The objective of this study is to evaluate the skin problems caused by personal protection equipment (PPE) in health care workers (HCWs) and to individuate eventual risk factors. From May to June 2020 a retrospective observational multi‐centric study conducted by an online survey sent by email, involving 10 hospital centers, was performed. We considered as independent variables gender and age, occupational group and sector, time of utilization, type and material of PPE. We tested 3 types of PPE: gloves, bonnet, and mask for different time of utilization (<1, 1–3, 3–6, >6 h). We performed a multiple logistic regression model to correlate them with skin adverse events occurrence. Among all the 1184 participants, 292 workers reported a dermatological pathology: 45 (15.41%) had psoriasis, 54 (18.49%) eczema, 38 (13.01%) acne, 48 (16.44%) seborrheic dermatitis, and 107 (36.64%) other. In our sample previous inflammatory dermatological conditions, female sex, prolonged use of PPE were significant risk factors for developing skin related adverse events considering all the PPE considered. The use of PPE is still mandatory in the hospital setting and skin adverse reactions still represent a global problem. Although data from Europe are limited, our study highlighted the importance of the problem of PPE skin reactions in a large sample of Italian healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to evaluate the skin problems caused by personal protection equipment (PPE) in health care workers (HCWs) suggesting preventive measures to avoid the risk to develop skin diseases. This work was designed a retrospective observational multi-centric study conducted by an online survey sent by email, involving 10 hospi- We performed descriptive statistics to describe sociodemographic aspects of participants and study variables characteristics, which were presented through theoretical score ranges, arithmetic means, standard deviations. Pearson bivariate correlations were performed to check multi-collinearity and to give some preliminary information into relationships between dermatological disease and the use of PPE. P values were considered significant if they were <0.05. In a second stage the significant predictors of the first stage were entered together in a final multiple logistic regression models. Data were stratified by gender, age, occupational group and sector, time of PPE utilization, type and material of PPE. Crude odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted ORs for all the other entered variables, along with 95% confidence intervals, were calculated. To analyze the collected data, we used the STATA 16 statistical package. The sample included 1184 participants; skewness and kurtosis were used to investigate the distribution of the collected data and Shapiro- We observed in 25 (2.11%) workers a loss of occupational days due to dermatological illness; in 56 times workers asked for occupational physician surveillance; in 30 cases, HCWs were removed from their workplaces and treated with specialist dermatological prescriptions. We evaluated 3 types of PPE: gloves (Table 1) , bonnet ( Table 2) and mask ( We first analyzed the adverse effects on the hands; we found a statistically significant correlation (p < 0.05) between adverse effects and dermatological pathologies (atopic dermatitis [AD], SD, acne and psoriasis), age, sex, and time of utilization (Table 5 ). There was no correlation with the type of gloves (p = 0.28). The regression analysis showed an OR of 1.56 for women, an higher OR for young adults (the highest risk has been observed between 21 and 30 years) and an increased risk with time of utilization of the gloves; the job and the working sector did not have some role. The model of regression had p < 0.001, R2 of 0.06, sensitivity of 71.07% and specificity of 53.55%; the model describes well the set of observations (goodness of fit p = 0.41). Concerning the adverse effects linked to bonnet use, we found a statistically significant (p < 0.05) correlation between adverse effects and dermatological pathologies, age, sex, and time of utilization; there was no correlation with age (p = 0.12) and type of PPE The regression analysis showed an OR of 1.87 for women, an higher OR for young adults (the highest risk has been observed between 21 and 30 years) and an increased risk with time of utilization of the gloves; the job and the working sector did not have some There is growing evidence that COVID-19 is associated with a variety Regarding PPEs related acne, which may be considered a subtype of acne mechanica, it occurs more frequently in subjects with a previous history of acne vulgaris. In this case, the endogenous skin characteristic that may explain this increased prevalence is hyperseborrhea, that leads to the development of an acne prone skin. The high temperature of the face covered by the mask induces an increased sebum excretion rate by 10% for each 1 C rise. In those subjects with a baseline overproduction of sebum this promotes the occurrence of acneic lesions especially in concomitance with surgical mask use. 15 Finally, psoriatic patients are more likely to develop inflammatory lesions compared with the unaffected subjects as a result of maskrelated Koebner phenomenon. 16 All the PPEs adverse effects have shown to be time-dependent. The prolonged use of these devices promotes the development of a warm, moist, occlusive environment, a well described risk factor for the occurrence of various inflammatory lesions. Last, our study has put in evidence that women more likely than men report the occurrence of skin problems caused by all the examined PPEs. Possible reasons for these gender disparity can be individuated in the use of cosmetics, that can be a triggering factor Task force COVID-19 del Dipartimento Malattie Infettive e Servizio di Informatica Rational use of personal protective equipment for COVID-19 and considerations during severe shortages: interim guidance Iatrogenic dermatitis in times of COVID-19: a pandemic within a pandemic Evaluation of skin problems and dermatology life quality index in health care workers who use personal protection measures during COVID-19 pandemic Skin involvement in SARS-CoV-2 infection: case series Active implications for dermatologists in 'SARS-CoV-2 ERA': personal experience and review of literature The adverse skin reactions of health care workers using personal protective equipment for COVID-19 The dermatological effects and occupational impacts of personal protective equipment on a large sample of healthcare workers during the Covid-19 pandemic Skin reactions to non-glove personal protective equipment: an emerging issue in the COVID-19 pandemic Cutaneous manifestations in adult patients with COVID-19 and dermatologic conditions related to the COVID-19 pandemic in health care workers Adverse skin reactions among healthcare workers during the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak: a survey in Wuhan and its surrounding regions Skin adverse events related to personal protective equipment: a systematic review and meta-analysis Irritant contact dermatitis in healthcare workers as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study Seborrheic dermatitis and anti-COVID-19 masks Adverse skin reactions to personal protective equipment against severe acute respiratory syndrome-a descriptive study in Singapore Mask-induced Koebner phenomenon and its clinical phenotypes: a multicenter, real-life study focusing on 873 dermatological consultations during COVID-19 pandemics Who is wearing a mask? Gender-, age-, and location-related differences during the COVID-19 pandemic face mask perceptions, and face mask wearing: are men being dangerous during the COVID-19 pandemic? Personal Individ Differ Adverse skin reactions to personal protective equipment during COVID-19 pandemic in Italian health care workers The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3795-3190Nicoletta Bernardini https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6295-3574Ersilia Tolino https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7861-9338Simone Michelini https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3374-7384Salvatore Volpe https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6367-2344