Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33814358›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of dermatology : EJD2021

"Face mask dermatitis" due to compulsory facial masks during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: data from 550 health care and non-health care workers in Germany.

Anne-Charlotte Niesert, Eva M Oppel, Tobias Nellessen, Surina Frey, Benjamin M Clanner-Engelshofen, Andreas Wollenberg, Lars E French, Markus Reinholz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of dermatology : EJD, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Anti-COVID-19 Face Masks and Perioral Dermatitis.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Anne-Charlotte NiesertDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Eva M OppelDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Tobias NellessenDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Surina FreyDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Benjamin M Clanner-EngelshofenDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Andreas WollenbergDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Lars E FrenchDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Markus ReinholzDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, wearing face masks is mandatory not only for health care workers (HCWs) but also for the general population in many countries around the globe.

objectivesThe aim of the study was to investigate the onset of adverse facial skin reactions due to compulsory face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic in HCWs and non-HCWs, and draw awareness of this new dermatological condition and its preventive measures. MATERIALS &

methodsA questionnaire was distributed to 550 patients and HCWs from the Department of Dermatology and Allergy of the University Hospital Munich (LMU), Germany. Participants were surveyed regarding mask type, duration of usage and adverse facial skin reactions. Information on symptoms and the use of skin care products and topical drugs were retrieved.

resultsThe duration of wearing masks showed a significant impact on the prevalence of symptoms (p < 0.001). Type IV hypersensitivity was significantly more likely in participants with symptoms compared to those without symptoms (p = 0.001), whereas no increase in symptoms was observed in participants with atopic diathesis. HCWs used facial skin care products significantly more often than non-HCWs (p = 0.001).

conclusionPreventive and therapeutic measures should be established in order to avoid "face mask dermatitis", especially for people with underlying risk factors.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelCOVID-19Dermatitis, ContactDermatitis, OccupationalFacial DermatosesGermanyHumansMasksadverse skin reactionsCOVID-19face mask dermatitishealth care workersSARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Identifiers

PMID33814358
PMCPMC8356539
OpenAlexW3142249877

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.