13 research outputs found
Comparative quantification of health risks: Conceptual framework and methodological issues
Reliable and comparable analysis of risks to health is key for preventing disease and injury. Causal attribution of morbidity and mortality to risk factors has traditionally been conducted in the context of methodological traditions of individual risk factors, often in a limited number of settings, restricting comparability. In this paper, we discuss the conceptual and methodological issues for quantifying the population health effects of individual or groups of risk factors in various levels of causality using knowledge from different scientific disciplines. The issues include: comparing the burden of disease due to the observed exposure distribution in a population with the burden from a hypothetical distribution or series of distributions, rather than a single reference level such as non-exposed; considering the multiple stages in the causal network of interactions among risk factor(s) and disease outcome to allow making inferences about some combinations of risk factors for which epidemiological studies have not been conducted, including the joint effects of multiple risk factors; calculating the health loss due to risk factor(s) as a time-indexed "stream" of disease burden due to a time-indexed "stream" of exposure, including consideration of discounting; and the sources of uncertainty
The European Standard Series in 9 European Countries, 2002/2003 - First Results of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies
Since January 2001, the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA), supported by European Union funding (contract QLK4-CT-2001-00343), has started to collect patch-test data. This comprises a standardized clinical history and the patch-test results using the European standard series, from 17 centres in 9 European countries listed above. In 2002 and 2003, 10 511 patients' test results have been pooled and analysed. The anamnestic data partly reflect the subspecialties of some centres. The most common allergen was nickel sulfate (17.3%); however, large international variations were observed. The prevalence of contact allergy to Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru) (5.8%) is coming close to the frequency found with the fragrance mix (6.4%). Regarding contact allergy to chromium compounds, different frequencies were noted in the 2 centres focused on occupational dermatitis (2.3% in the FIOH versus 7.4% in the Nofer Institute). These most likely reflect the beneficial effect of addition of ferrous sulfate in one, but not the other country. As differences may partly be due to different patch-test reading, standardization may need to be refined further. By providing post-marketing surveillance in the field of contact allergy, ESSCA will meet its objective of increased consumer safety across Europe
Patch test results with fragrance markers of the baseline series - Analysis of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) network 2009-2012
Background: Contact allergy to fragrances is common, and impairs quality of life, particularly in young women.
Objective: To provide current results on the prevalences of sensitization to fragrance allergens used as markers in the baseline series of most European countries.
Methods: Data of patients consecutively patch tested between 2009 and 2012 in 12 European countries with fragrance allergens contained in the baseline series were collected by the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies network and descriptively analysed. Four departments used the TRUE Test(\uae) system.
Results: The 'basic markers' were tested on 51 477 [fragrance mix II (FM II)] to 57 123 [Myroxylon pereirae, balsam of Peru] patients, and yielded positive reactions as follows: fragrance mix I 6.9%, Myroxylon pereirae 5.4%, FM II 3.8%, colophonium 2.6%, and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde 1.7%, with some regional differences. Prevalences with TRUE Test(\uae) allergens were lower. Additional fragrances were tested on 3643 (trimethylbenzenepropanol) to 14 071 (oil of turpentine) patients, and yielded between 2.6% (Cananga odorata) and 0.7% (trimethylbenzenepropanol) positive reactions.
Conclusions: Contact allergy to fragrances is common throughout Europe, with regional variation probably being explained by patch test technique, and differences in exposure and referral patterns. The current basic markers of fragrance sensitivity in the baseline series should be supplemented with additional fragrance allergens