Citations

There is increasingly a call for clinical relevance in the teaching of the biomedical sciences within all health care programs. This presupposes that there is an understanding of what is “core” material within the curriculum. To date, the anatomical sciences have been poorly served by the development of core syllabuses, although there have been commendable attempts to define a core syllabus for gross anatomy in medicine and for some medical specialties. The International Federation of Associations of Anatomists and the European Federation for Experimental Morphology aim to formulate, on an international basis, core syllabuses for all branches of the anatomical sciences. This is being undertaken at the initial stage using Delphi Panels consisting of a team of anatomists, scientists, and clinicians who evaluate syllabus content and accord each element/topic “essential,” “important,” “acceptable,” or “not required” status. Their initial conjectures, published on the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists' website, provide merely a framework to enable anatomical (and other cognate learned) societies and individual anatomists, clinicians, and students to comment upon the syllabuses. This article presents the concepts and methodological approaches underlying the hybrid Delphi process employed. Preliminary findings relating to the development of a neuroanatomy core syllabus are provided to illustrate the methods initially employed by a Delphi Panel. The approach is novel in that it is international in scope, is conceptually democratic, and is developmentally fluid in terms of availability for amendment. The aim is to set internationally recognized standards and thus to provide guidelines concerning anatomical knowledge when engaged in course development. Anat Sci Educ 7: 302–311. © 2014 American Association of Anatomists.

Background Patients with a sore or burning mouth associated with clinically normal oral mucosa present a difficult diagnostic challenge. Objective The objective of this study was to assess the value of patch testing in patients with burning mouth syndrome. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the results of patch testing to an oral series in patients with burning mouth syndrome seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, between January 2000 and April 2006. Results Of 195 consecutive patients with a burning or sore mouth, 75 had patch testing to an oral series, and 28 of these patients (37.3%) had allergic patch test reactions. The most common allergens were nickel sulfate hexahydrate 2.5%, balsam of Peru, and gold sodium thiosulfate 0.5%. On follow-up, 15 patients reported improvement, 4 removed or avoided the offending dental metal, and 6 avoided the dietary allergen. Thirteen patients did not improve; 6 avoided identified allergens, but without improvement; 1 removed dental metals without symptom change; and 5 avoided test-positive dietary allergens but without improvement. The remaining 7 nonresponders had nonrelevant patch test results or did not avoid allergens. Conclusions Patch testing can identify patients who may be allergic to dental metals or dietary additives and who may benefit from removal or avoidance of these.

Background Recognition of allergic contact dermatitis attributed to textile dyes and resins is steadily increasing. Objective This study aims to review the results of patch testing with a textile series at our institution and to compare with previously published reports. Methods We performed a retrospective review of results in patients who underwent patch testing using a series of textile dyes and resins from January 1, 2000, through September 30, 2011. Results A total of 671 patients (mean age, 56.5 years; female, 65.9%) were patch tested with the textile series (42 dyes and resins). These patients were also generally tested with the standard patch test series (n = 620). Of the patients, 219 (32.6%) demonstrated allergic reaction to 1 or more textile dyes and resins, and 71 (10.6%) manifested irritant reactions. The most frequent allergens were disperse blue 106 1% (8.3%), disperse blue 124 1% (8.0%), and melamine formaldehyde 7% (8.0%). Of patients tested with the standard series, 36 (5.8%) showed a positive reaction to the traditional textile screening allergen p -phenylenediamine 1%. Conclusions Supplementing the standard series with the textile series increased detection of textile allergies. In patients suspected of textile allergy, addition of the textile series is necessary for appropriate diagnosis.

Background Current evaluation of suspected allergic contact dermatitis to lanolin includes patch testing to lanolin alcohol (30% in petrolatum). Using this method, the prevalence of lanolin allergy is low (1.8%–2.5%). Objective The objective of this study was to determine whether patch testing to a single lanolin derivative results in underdiagnosis compared with patch testing to 12 lanolin derivatives. Methods Patients were prospectively patch tested to (1) lanolin alcohol (30% in petrolatum) in our standard allergen series; (2) Amerchol L101 (50% in petrolatum) in our cosmetic series; and (3) 10 lanolin derivatives (using concentrations and vehicles recommended in the literature) in a supplemental series. Results Of 286 patients, the overall prevalence of positive reactions to lanolin in at least 1 of the 3 patch test series was 6.29% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.48%-9.11%) (n = 18). The prevalence rates of lanolin allergy using the standard, cosmetic, and supplemental series were 1.05% (95% CI, 0%–2.23%), 3.85% (95% CI, 1.62%–6.07%), and 3.85% (95% CI, 1.62%–6.07%), respectively. Amerchol L101 was associated with increased reaction rates compared with the standard (odds ratio, 3.81; P = 0.007) and supplemental (odds ratio, 8.85; P < 0.001) series, whereas reaction rates were similar for the standard and supplemental series ( P = 0.78). Conclusions Amerchol L101 and patients’ own products should be added to a standard patch testing allergen series to adequately identify lanolin allergy.

Background and objectives Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) of the vulva arises as a primary condition or develops secondary to topical agents. We aimed to describe the incidence of ACD in patients presenting with vulvar symptoms and to identify the allergens of most importance. Patients and Methods Using a database of the patch testing results from 3 geographically distinct sites, we identified patients tested to a gynecologic series between 2003 and 2010. Patients had patch testing to the standard European battery and a gynecologic series. Patch testing was in line with accepted universal methods: application on day 1, allergen removal and initial reading on day 3, and final reading on day 5. Results Ninety patients were included. Thirty-five (39%) had a relevant positive result. The 5 allergens with the highest number of cases with a relevant reaction were natural fragrance mix 2%, balsam of Peru, benzocaine 5%, fragrance mix 8%, and quaternium 15 1%. The most common gynecologic series allergen to cause a relevant reaction was terconazole. Conclusions Allergic contact dermatitis is a frequent finding in patients presenting with vulvar symptoms. We identified a relevant positive result to patch testing in 39%. We found fragrances, medicaments, and preservatives to be of most relevance.

The term cosmetic has a broad definition and includes personal care products, hair care products, nail care products, and sunscreens. Modern cosmetics are safe for most users, and adverse reactions are very rare because the manufacturers invest heavily in safety, quality control, and product testing before releasing the product to the market. Despite these efforts, adverse reactions occur. Skin care products are major contributors to cosmetic allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), followed by hair care and nail care products. The most common allergens are fragrances and preservatives. The diagnosis of cosmetic allergy is established by reviewing the patient’s clinical history and physical examination findings and confirmed with skin patch testing. Patch testing is the standard method for detecting allergens responsible for eliciting ACD. The purpose of this article was to review the prevalence, legislative laws, and role of patch testing in ACD.