Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37219622›Full record

ReviewDermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2023

[Hand eczema and statutory accident insurance-what you should know for your practice].

Swen Malte John, Cara Symanzik, Christoph Skudlik

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Swen Malte JohnAbteilung Dermatologie, Umweltmedizin und Gesundheitstheorie, Universität Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Deutschland. johnderm@uni-osnabrueck.de.
Cara SymanzikAbteilung Dermatologie, Umweltmedizin und Gesundheitstheorie, Universität Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Deutschland.
Christoph SkudlikAbteilung Dermatologie, Umweltmedizin und Gesundheitstheorie, Universität Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since January 1, 2021, recognition of occupational hand eczema as an occupational disease (OD) No. 5101 has been made significantly easier by eliminating the obligation to cease and desist work in the eczema-eliciting job. As a result of this change in OD law, an occupational disease can now also be recognized if the patient continues the (eczema-eliciting) work. This results in a significantly higher liability for accident insurance companies to enable high-quality care for affected patients by the dermatologist-and this, if necessary, in the long term until retirement. The number of recognized OD No. 5101 cases has already increased tenfold (around 4000 cases per year). Work-related hand eczema must be treated as quickly as possible in order to avoid a protracted course of the disease and job loss. Accordingly, those affected should be reported quickly to the accident insurance (dermatologist's report and/or OD notification). After the notification, in addition to the granting of outpatient treatment, the reporting dermatologist has an extensive range of preventive measures available (including skin protection seminars and inpatient treatment). In addition, there are no prescription fees and even basic skin care can be prescribed ("basic therapy"). The extra-budgetary care of hand eczema as a recognized occupational disease is associated with many advantages for the dermatologist's practice and the patient.

Indexed as

Dermatitis, OccupationalEczemaHumansInsurance, AccidentQuality of Health CareRecordsAccident insuranceDermatologist procedureDermatologist reportHand eczemaOccupation

Identifiers

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.