Abstract:Abstract A 35-year-old nail and beauty technician presented with severe hand and finger dermatitis. She had a 5-year history of eczema on her neck and trunk, which had improved with avoidance of balsam of Peru, to which she had previously tested positive on patch testing. Unfortunately, the patient began experiencing debilitating hand symptoms 2 years ago, escalating into painful, cracked, excoriated and fissured hands. Further patch testing revealed positive reactions to acrylates, specifically 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate, 2-hydroxyethyl acrylate, and triethylene glycol diacrylate – common components in acrylic, gel and shellac nail products used daily in her profession. Advised on strict allergen avoidance, the patient hesitated, citing practicality concerns given her lack of alternative income sources and qualifications. Reluctant to undergo a period of avoidance, she grappled with accepting her occupation as a likely source of her hand dermatitis and was keen to explore alternative options. Occupational acrylate allergy poses challenges for nail technicians, with symptoms often proving difficult to control once sensitized. Rapid acrylate penetration through most glove types complicates protective measures. Nitrile gloves offer marginally longer protection compared with latex, while laminate 4H gloves provide superior defence but limit manual dexterity. A study exploring an in vivo model for glove efficacy used open chambers filled with the acrylate gels, which were applied to the back with tape, and gloves attached as a membrane between the gel and the skin [Ursberg AM, Bergendorff O, Thorsson AC, Isaksson M. Is there a good in vivo method to show whether gloves are sufficiently protective when a nail technician is exposed to (meth)acrylates? An in vivo pilot study. Contact Dermatitis 2016; 75: 62–5]. The glove materials were then tested at four exposure times. This study showed promise in ascertaining which gloves offered appropriate protection for an individual, but is limited in practicality due to its prolonged duration. Applying the results from the study to clinical practice, the patient was first treated with oral steroids to clear her hands, and was then recommended to double glove during procedures. She was advised to ensure that she spent no more than 20 min with each client, in order to reduce penetration time of the acrylate through the gloves. This, along with frequent handwashing in between clients and regular workspace cleaning, has allowed her to successfully continue her career for the last 3 years. This case underscores the importance of finding collaborative solutions with patients, even if not medically ideal, and offering practical approaches for individuals facing challenging allergens to avoid. This case also highlights the usefulness of applying basic science research to clinical practice for the benefit of patients.

2‐Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2‐HEMA) sensitization, a global epidemic at its peak in Spain?

Acrylates and Methacrylates Sensitization in Patients with Orthopedic and Dental Prostheses: Asymptomatic Pre-Implant and Symptomatic Post-Implant Testing

Recommendation to include hydroxyethyl (meth)acrylate in the British baseline patch test series

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by nail acrylates in Europe. An EECDRG study

Pandemic of sensitivity to acrylate containing nail cosmetic among young Israeli women? Result of patch testing 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate in the European baseline series

Sensitisation to textile dyes in Spain: Epidemiological situation (2019–2022)

Contact allergy caused by acrylates in nail cosmetics: A pilot study from Greece

Allergic Contact Dermatitis, Allergic Airborne Dermatitis, and Occupational Asthma Caused by (meth)acrylates in Artificial Nails

Sensitisation to the acrylate co‐polymers glyceryl acrylate/acrylic acid co‐polymer, sodium polyacrylate and acrylates/C10‐30 alkyl acrylate cross‐polymer (Carbopol®) is rare

Sensitisation to ethylhexyl salicylate: Another piece of the frontal fibrosing alopecia puzzle

CD08 ‘If it’s not the hair maybe it’s in the air?’ A case of allergic contact dermatitis from airborne exposure to acrylates

Occupational contact allergy: The European perspective-Analysis of patch test data from ESSCA between 2011 and 2020

Delayed and immediate allergy caused by methylhexahydrophthalic anhydride

Shoe contact dermatitis from dimethyl fumarate: clinical manifestations, patch test results, chemical analysis, and source of exposure

Trends in contact sensitization, results, and implications from a contact dermatitis clinic in Israel

Occupational Allergic Contact Dermatitis Caused by Epoxy Resin in the Centre of Portugal

Polysensitization in the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Registry (REIDAC): A 2019–2022 prospective study with cluster and network analysis

CD12 A case of occupational acrylate allergy: a success story!

CD02 What is the relevance of epoxy resin in the baseline series?

An emerging epidemic of allergic contact dermatitis due to phytonadione epoxide (oxidised vitamin K1)

Acrylates: new sources and new allergens