Are material safety data sheets (MSDS) useful in the diagnosis and management of occupational contact dermatitis?

Keegel, Tessa, Suanders, Helen, LaMontagne, Anthony D. and Nixon, Rosemary 2007, Are material safety data sheets (MSDS) useful in the diagnosis and management of occupational contact dermatitis?, Contact dermatitis, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 331-336, doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01231.x.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Are material safety data sheets (MSDS) useful in the diagnosis and management of occupational contact dermatitis?
Author(s) Keegel, Tessa
Suanders, Helen
LaMontagne, Anthony D.ORCID iD for LaMontagne, Anthony D. orcid.org/0000-0002-5811-5906
Nixon, Rosemary
Journal name Contact dermatitis
Volume number 57
Issue number 5
Start page 331
End page 336
Total pages 6
Publisher Wiley
Place of publication London, Eng.
Publication date 2007-11
ISSN 0105-1873
Keyword(s) allergic contact dermatitis
globally harmonized system
hand dermatitis
hazardous substances
irritants
patch testing
sensitizers
worker
Summary This study assesses both the success of medical practitioners in accessing hazardous substances' information from product manufacturers and the accuracy and clinical usefulness of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) presented by workers with suspected occupational contact dermatitis (OCD). 00 consecutively presented MSDS were collected from 42 workers attending an occupational dermatology clinic. Product manufacturers were contacted to verify ingredients. MSDS were evaluated for compliance with the Australian criteria for listing of OCD relevant information (sensitizers present at a concentration > or =1%, irritants present at a concentration > or =20%), and for clinical usefulness. All sensitizers were checked for clinical relevance to the worker's dermatitis. Manufacturers supplied product constituents for 77/100 MSDS. 58 MSDS satisfied the Australian standard. 57/58 MSDS were deemed clinically useful. Irritants were listed for 19/23 MSDS and sensitizers were listed for 30/68 MSDS (P = 0.001). 3 MSDS contained sensitizers, which were clinically relevant to the presenting worker's dermatitis, 1 appropriately listed, 1 present at > or =1% but not listed, and 1 present at <1% in the product and therefore, not required to be listed. Sensitizers are frequently omitted from MSDS and clinicians are often unsuccessful in obtaining crucial information from manufacturers. MSDS are inadequate for the protection and diagnosis of workers with suspected OCD.
Language eng
DOI 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01231.x
Field of Research 119999 Medical and Health Sciences not elsewhere classified
Socio Economic Objective 970111 Expanding Knowledge in the Medical and Health Sciences
HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30065750

Document type: Journal Article
Collections: Faculty of Health
School of Health and Social Development
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 11 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 12 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 420 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Tue, 16 Sep 2014, 14:17:30 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.