Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
15th National Conference of the IAOMFP, Chennai, 2006
Abstract
Abstracts from current literature
Acne in India: Guidelines for management - IAA Consensus Document
Addendum
Announcement
Art & Psychiatry
Article
Articles
Association Activities
Association Notes
Award Article
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Analysis
Case Letter
Case Letters
Case Notes
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical and Laboratory Investigations
Clinical Article
Clinical Studies
Clinical Study
Commentary
Conference Oration
Conference Summary
Continuing Medical Education
Correspondence
Corrigendum
Cosmetic Dermatology
Cosmetology
Current Best Evidence
Current View
Derma Quest
Dermato Surgery
Dermatopathology
Dermatosurgery Specials
Dispensing Pearl
Do you know?
Drug Dialogues
e-IJDVL
Editor Speaks
Editorial
Editorial Remarks
Editorial Report
Editorial Report - 2007
Editorial report for 2004-2005
Errata
Erratum
Focus
Fourth All India Conference Programme
From Our Book Shelf
From the Desk of Chief Editor
General
Get Set for Net
Get set for the net
Guest Article
Guest Editorial
History
How I Manage?
IADVL Announcement
IADVL Announcements
IJDVL Awards
IJDVL AWARDS 2015
IJDVL Awards 2018
IJDVL Awards 2019
IJDVL Awards 2020
IJDVL International Awards 2018
Images in Clinical Practice
In Memorium
Inaugural Address
Index
Knowledge From World Contemporaries
Leprosy Section
Letter in Response to Previous Publication
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor - Case Letter
Letter to the Editor - Letter in Response to Published Article
LETTER TO THE EDITOR - LETTERS IN RESPONSE TO PUBLISHED ARTICLES
Letter to the Editor - Observation Letter
Letter to the Editor - Study Letter
Letter to the Editor - Therapy Letter
Letter to the Editor: Articles in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor - Letter in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor: Case Letters
Letters to the Editor: Letters in Response to Previously Published Articles
Medicolegal Window
Messages
Miscellaneous Letter
Musings
Net Case
Net case report
Net Image
Net Letter
Net Quiz
Net Study
New Preparations
News
News & Views
Obervation Letter
Obituary
Observation Letter
Observation Letters
Oration
Original Article
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
Original Contributions
Pattern of Skin Diseases
Pearls
Pediatric Dermatology
Pediatric Rounds
Perspective
Presedential Address
Presidential Address
Presidents Remarks
Quiz
Recommendations
Regret
Report
Report of chief editor
Report of Hon : Treasurer IADVL
Report of Hon. General Secretary IADVL
Research Methdology
Research Methodology
Resident page
Resident's Page
Resident’s Page
Residents' Corner
Residents' Corner
Residents' Page
Retraction
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revision Corner
Self Assessment Programme
SEMINAR
Seminar: Chronic Arsenicosis in India
Seminar: HIV Infection
Short Communication
Short Communications
Short Report
Special Article
Specialty Interface
Studies
Study Letter
Supplement-Photoprotection
Supplement-Psoriasis
Symposium - Contact Dermatitis
Symposium - Lasers
Symposium - Pediatric Dermatoses
Symposium - Psoriasis
Symposium - Vesicobullous Disorders
SYMPOSIUM - VITILIGO
Symposium Aesthetic Surgery
Symposium Dermatopathology
Symposium-Hair Disorders
Symposium-Nails Part I
Symposium-Nails-Part II
Tables
Technology
Therapeutic Guidelines
Therapeutic Guidelines - IADVL
Therapeutics
Therapy
Therapy Letter
View Point
Viewpoint
What’s new in Dermatology
View/Download PDF
Letter To Editor
2006:72:2;150-151
doi: 10.4103/0378-6323.25645
PMID: 16707826

Nickel nuisance: A clinical observation

AD Sharma
 Consultant Dermatologist, Bongaigaon, Assam, India

Correspondence Address:
A D Sharma
Singha Road, Barpara, PO and District Bongaigaon 783 380, Assam
India
How to cite this article:
Sharma A D. Nickel nuisance: A clinical observation. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2006;72:150-151
Copyright: (C)2006 Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology

Sir,

Nickel allergy is a common and distressing dermatological problem. Nickel sensitivity is common in the general population and the prevalence rate varies from 4-13.1%.[1] Nickel is present in many of the jewellery items; clothing material like metal zips, bra hooks, suspender clips, etc.; personal articles like watches, lipstick holder, knives, etc.; and household metals like kitchen utensils, machinery parts, orthopedic implants, etc. Human beings are continuously being exposed to nickel in the environment, be it in the home or workplace.

It is observed that nickel sensitivity is more common among females and the incidence rate is about 10% and it is increasing.[2] One of the important causes for such high rate is availability of cheap fashion jewellery in the market that releases free nickel when coming in contact with body sweat, as well as frequent use of such jewellery by women. Nickel ions released from such materials, coming in contact with the human skin, may cause sensitization, especially when the contact is for a prolonged period.

In an effort to control the situation, several countries in the world have established regulations regarding the use of nickel in jewellery. For example, Denmark has banned the sale of any jewellery or clothing accessory that releases more than 0.5 mg/cm 2/week of nickel.[3] This effort of the Danish government has shown impressive results; Nielson et al. conducted a study where they observed the incidence rate of allergic contact sensitization to nickel and other allergens in Danish adults between 1990 and 1998. They found that there was a significant drop in the incidence rate of allergic contact sensitization to nickel after the restriction imposed by the Danish government.[4]

Similarly, many western countries have passed similar laws for the benefit of the common people.

From 2001, the European Union Nickel Directive[5] limits nickel in items intended for direct and prolonged contact with skin, such as jewellery, watches, buttons, spectacle frames, etc. The limit value for nickel release is 0.5 mg/cm 2/week. The nickel content in piercing posts has to be below 0.05%. In India, unfortunately, we do not have a similar type of law till date.

A study was conducted to detect free nickel released from jewellery/personal articles/clothing accessories generally used by the common people. In this study, 200 patients (112 females and 88 males) who attended my clinic for different skin problems were requested to participate. Dimethylglyoxime test was conducted to detect free nickel released from their jewellery/personal articles/clothing accessories. Dimethylglyoxime test is specific for nickel.

In this test, two chemicals are used: dimethylglyoxime (1% alcoholic solution) and ammonium hydroxide solution (10%). A drop of each chemical is applied to a small piece of cotton; then the piece of cotton is rubbed against the metal. If the cotton remains clear, the item has no free nickel and is unlikely to cause nickel dermatitis and the result is negative. If the cotton turns pink-red, it contains free nickel and may cause dermatitis in nickel-sensitive individuals and the result is positive. Any other color, except red-pink, is due to the presence of other metals and in such circumstances presence of free nickel cannot be ruled out and the result is inconclusive (indeterminate).

These chemicals cause no harm to the item tested. The results of the test are tabulated in [Table - 1].

The results of the study threw up some alarming facts about the most commonly used metallic items.

Safety pins have ubiquitous usage across India and all the safety pins used by the participants showed positive result with dimethylglyoxime test; which should be a major cause of worry for its potential impact on most women across India.

Wristwatches, another very frequently used item, showed alarmingly high incidences of free nickel, with around 64% of the specimens testing positive. Wristwatches are potentially more hazardous as the area of skin contact is a lot more and are normally worn daily for prolonged periods. Though not prone to as much skin contact, spectacle frames showed a surprisingly high incidence rate, with half of them showing positive results.

Amongst jewellery items, earrings had the highest incidence rate, with a third showing positive results; followed by bracelets and bangles, which were very close, with every fourth testing positive. Jewellery items like rings, necklaces and chains showed the lowest incidence rates: in the range of 2-5%. Surprisingly, all the nose rings tested were found free from free nickel on dimethylglyoxime test.

The results of the study clearly show that many of the jewellery/personal articles/clothing accessories used by common people contain free nickel. Our market is flooded with these types of articles for consumers. Unknowingly, people are being exposed continuously to one of the commonest sensitizers in the world. Unless the public is informed about this menace and our government limits the use of nickel in jewellery/clothing accessories as is done in the European Union, more cases of nickel allergy will come up. A legal restraint is the only way to protect the common people from this nuisance.

References
1.
Hammershoy O. Standard patch test results in 3225 consecutive patients from 1973 to 1977. Contact Dermatitis 1980;6:263-8.
[Google Scholar]
2.
Edman B, Moller H. Trends and forecast for standard allergens in a 12-year test material. Contact Dermatitis 1982;8:95-104.
[Google Scholar]
3.
Menne T, Rasmussen K. Regulation of nickel exposure in Denmark. Contact Dermatitis 1990;23:57-8.
[Google Scholar]
4.
Nielson NH, Linneberg A, Menne T. Incidence of allergic contact sensitization in Danish adults between 1990 and 1998; the Copenhagen Allergy study, Denmark. Br J Dermatol 2002;147:487-92.
[Google Scholar]
5.
Liden Carola. Nickel Sulfate. In: Wahlberg JE, Elsner P, Kanerva L, Maibach HI, editors. Management of positive patch test reaction. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2003. p. 7-9.
[Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
178

PDF downloads
42
Show Sections