Pitfalls and Errors in Patch Testing: Suggestions for Quality Assurance

Patch testing is a complex procedure requiring considerable knowledge, experience, and infrastructure. As all comparable medical procedures, it is prone to pitfalls and errors. These relate to patient selection; selection and preparation of patch test allergens; their application, reading, and interpreting the patch test reaction; and judging patch test relevance. In this chapter, frequent pitfalls and errors encountered in patch testing are described. With an up-to-date quality assurance system in the patch test unit, they can be prevented with a high probability.

[1]  J. Hegewald,et al.  The impact of meteorological conditions on patch test results with 12 standard series allergens (fragrances, biocides, topical ingredients) , 2008, The British journal of dermatology.

[2]  D. Bruynzeel,et al.  The outcome of an additional patch‐test reading on days 6 or 7 , 2000, Contact dermatitis.

[3]  J. Geier,et al.  Simultaneous sodium lauryl sulphate testing improves the diagnostic validity of allergic patch tests. Results from a prospective multicentre study of the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (Deutsche Kontaktallergie‐Gruppe, DKG) , 2005, The British journal of dermatology.

[4]  J. Nethercott.  Practical problems in the use of patch testing in the evaluation of patients with contact dermatitis , 1990 .

[5]  W. Oetgen,et al.  Characteristics of medical professional liability claims against dermatologists: data from 2704 closed claims in a voluntary registry. , 2012, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[6]  D. Belsito.  Patch testing with a standard allergen (“screening”) tray: rewards and risks , 2004, Dermatologic therapy.

[7]  J. Lachapelle.  A proposed relevance scoring system for positive allergic patch test reactions: practical implications and limitations , 1997, Contact dermatitis.

[8]  B. Gruvberger,et al.  Which test chambers should be used for acetone, ethanol, and water solutions when patch testing? , 2007, Contact dermatitis.

[9]  A. Weaver,et al.  Delayed patch test reading after 5 days: the Mayo Clinic experience. , 2008, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[10]  S. Devos,et al.  The risk of active sensitization to PPD , 2001, Contact dermatitis.

[11]  B. Gruvberger,et al.  Comparison of three different techniques for application of water solutions to Finn Chambers® , 2010, Contact dermatitis.

[12]  J. Björk,et al.  ‘Calibration’ of our patch test reading technique is necessary , 2012, Contact dermatitis.

[13]  M. Corazza,et al.  Analysis of patch test referrals: influence of appropriateness of referrals on sensitization rate , 2012, Contact dermatitis.

[14]  A. Goossens,et al.  Thoughts on sensitizers in a standard patch test series , 1999, Contact dermatitis.

[15]  A. Karlberg,et al.  Autoxidation of linalyl acetate, the main component of lavender oil, creates potent contact allergens , 2007, Contact dermatitis.

[16]  C. Mowad.  Patch testing: pitfalls and performance , 2006, Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology.

[17]  S. M. Wilkinson,et al.  Audit of primary and secondary care as a source of patch test clinic referrals , 2004, The British journal of dermatology.

[18]  E. Cronin,et al.  Dermatitis artefacta with artefacta of patch tests , 1987 .

[19]  H. Maibach,et al.  Volatility of Fragrance Chemicals: Patch Testing Implications , 2009, Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug.

[20]  D. Becker.  Allergic contact dermatitis , 2013, Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG.

[21]  R Wilf-Miron,et al.  From aviation to medicine: applying concepts of aviation safety to risk management in ambulatory care , 2003, Quality & safety in health care.

[22]  D. Becker.  Das allergische Kontaktekzem , 2013 .

[23]  S. Fregert.  Manual of contact dermatitis : on behalf of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group and the North American Contact Dermatitis Group , 1974 .

[24]  T. Henseler,et al.  Evaluation of patch test results by use of the reaction index. An analysis of data recorded by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) * , 1995, Contact dermatitis.

[25]  B. Gruvberger,et al.  Recommendation of appropriate amounts of petrolatum preparation to be applied at patch testing * , 2007, Contact dermatitis.

[26]  W. Aberer,et al.  Pitfalls of patch testing with dental materials , 2012, The British journal of dermatology.

[27]  B. Gruvberger,et al.  Variation in the amount of petrolatum preparation applied at patch testing , 2007, Contact dermatitis.

[28]  K. Andersen,et al.  Cumulative irritancy in the guinea Pig from low grade irritant vehicles and the angry skin syndrome , 1980, Contact dermatitis.

[29]  H. Maibach,et al.  Managing the excited skin syndrome: patch testing hyperirritable skin , 1997, Contact dermatitis.