Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18972125›Full record

Trial reportInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2009

Effectiveness of skin protection creams in the prevention of occupational dermatitis: results of a randomized, controlled trial.

Robert Winker, Bayda Salameh, Sabine Stolkovich, Michael Nikl, Alfred Barth, Elisabeth Ponocny, Hans Drexler, Gerhard Tappeiner

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interventions for preventing occupational irritant hand dermatitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Robert WinkerDivision of Occupational Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. robert.winker@meduniwien.ac.at
Bayda Salameh
Sabine Stolkovich
Michael Nikl
Alfred Barth
Elisabeth Ponocny
Hans Drexler
Gerhard Tappeiner
Medical University of Vienna · ATFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEStatistics Austria · ATTU Wien · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of the trial was to investigate whether the publicized effects of skin protection creams can be replicated in a real occupational setting during activities that expose the skin.

methodsA prospective, randomized, four-tailed controlled pilot trial was performed to compare the effect of skin protection and skin care alone or in combination with cleansing against a control group (only cleansing). Two branches were selected for the investigation: the building industry and the timber industry. A total of 1,006 workers from these two branches were recruited, and out of these 485 workers were examined longitudinally for at least three time points over 1 year (lost for follow-up: 430 workers, exclusion: 91 workers). At each time point, as a primary outcome measure, we assessed the condition of the skin at both hands in a blinded manner and the individual was assigned to one of the following categories: no eczema, mild, moderate and severe eczema. As a secondary outcome measure, the worker's transepidermal water loss (TEWL) was measured under standardized conditions at the back of both hands. In addition, the workers were asked to evaluate their skin condition during the study.

resultsWith regard to differences in the occurrence of eczemas, we found only in workers in building industry without application of skin protection or skin care creams a statistical significant increase in the incidence between the first and the second visit and a statistical significant decrease in the incidence between the second and third visit. When evaluating the secondary outcome-measurement changes in the TEWL values, an improvement was found for the group skin protection and skin care in combination and by skin care alone. Females in the timber industry started with better TEWL values than males, which may be due to better overall skin care. In this group we found an improvement for the group skin protection and skin care in combination and by skin protection alone. For skin protection alone, we noted a slight, but not significant improvement in all other groups. The subjective improvement of skin condition was reported from the participants who used skin protection and skin care in combination.

conclusionsTaking all these secondary-outcome measurements together, the main result of this study was that skin protection creams alone have a small effect on the skin barrier in workers in the building and timber industries compared with skin care alone or in combination with skin protection.

Indexed as

AdultDermatitis, OccupationalDermatologic AgentsEczemaFacility Design and ConstructionFemaleForestryHand DermatosesHumansMaleOccupational ExposureProspective StudiesProtective ClothingSkin CareTreatment OutcomeDermatologic Agents

Identifiers

PMID18972125
OpenAlexW1996503884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.