ArticleContact dermatitis2022
Adverse skin reactions among health care workers using face personal protective equipment during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey of six hospitals in Denmark.
Article in Contact dermatitis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Skin Problems in the Facial Area due to the Use of Personal Protective Equipment in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical nursing · 2025Pooled it
- Contact dermatitis caused by prevention measures during the COVID-19 pandemic: a narrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- Facial dermatoses induced by face masks: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.Contact dermatitis · 2022Pooled it
- Protective equipment-related pressure ulcers in healthcare workers during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.Journal of tissue viability · 2022Pooled it
- Hand Eczema and Facial Skin Problems - Association with Occupational Exposures among Community Care Personnel in Sweden: A Cross-sectional Study.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2025Article
- Facial Dermatoses Associated With Mask-Wearing in the COVID-19 Era: A Nationwide, Cross-Sectional, Multicenter, Questionnaire-based Study.Annals of dermatology · 2024Article
- Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on adults and children with atopic dermatitis and food allergy: Systematic review.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2024Article
- Effect of Face Masking on Transmission of SARS-CoV-2.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Occupational Skin Dermatitis among Healthcare Workers Associated with the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Review of the Literature.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- The change in the frequency and severity of facial dermatoses and complaints in healthcare workers during the COVID-19.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2022Article
- Facial dermatoses and use of protective mask during Covid-19 pandemic: A clinical and psychological evaluation in patients affected by moderate-severe atopic dermatitis under treatment with dupilumab.Dermatologic therapy · 2022Article
- Adverse skin reactions among health care workers using face personal protective equipment during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey of six hospitals in Denmark.Contact dermatitis · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth care workers (HCWs) report frequent adverse skin reactions (ASRs) due to face personal protective equipment (F-PPE) use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.
objectivesTo describe self-reported ASRs among HCWs using F-PPE; investigate background factors, such as chronic skin diseases and skin types (dry, oily, combination, sensitive), and determine whether HCWs took preventive methods against ASRs.
methodsAn online questionnaire was distributed to 22 993 HCWs at hospitals.
resultsThe prevalence of ASRs was 61.9% based on 10 287 responders. Different types of F-PPE caused different reactions. The most common ASRs from surgical masks were spots and pimples (37.2%) and from FFP3 masks was red and irritated skin (27.3%). A significantly higher proportion of HCWs with chronic skin diseases had ASRs (71.6%) than those without chronic skin diseases (59.7%) (P < .001). Some skin types were more prone to ASRs (sensitive skin [78.8%] vs dry skin [54.3%]; P = .001). HCWs using F-PPE for >6 hours versus <3 hours per day had a four times higher ASR risk (P = <.001). Nearly all HCWs used preventive and/or counteractive methods (94.2%).
conclusionsIt is important to consider background factors, such as chronic skin diseases and skin types, to prevent and counteract ASRs due to F-PPE use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.