Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Textiles”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 811 records · Page 45Linked to original sources
PubMed1985

Textile dye dermatitis. A review.

The occurrence of dermatologic problems caused by consumer exposure to dyes on clothing is reviewed. Thirty-one dyes, mainly disperse with anthraquinone or azo structures, have caused allergic contact dermatitis. Phototoxic dye dermatitis is rare.

Azo Compounds↗
PubMed1985

Hand injuries in the textile industry.

This paper is a review of the hand injuries occurring in the Yorkshire Wool Industry and referred to the Regional Plastic Surgery Unit for skin replacement, or other treatment, during the years 1965-1984. A total of forty-one cases has been seen, and although the number employed in the industry has fallen about fivefold, the injuries referred yearly have remained approximately constant. An analysis of the types of injury has been made and the improvement in the results is shown with changes in the method of acute treatment. The case for early referral, active initial treatment and early mobilisation is very obvious from the results.

Accidents, Occupational↗
PubMed2002

Hand dermatitis as an unsuspected presentation of textile dye contact sensitivity.

The aim of this study was to evaluate disperse dye sensitization in patients with hand dermatitis. From January 1996 to December 2000, we identified 130 patients with hand dermatitis reacting to one of the 7 dyes included in our standard series. In 82 subjects the dermatitis was localized to the hands alone, whereas 48 patients had lesions both on the hands and on other skin sites. Disperse Blue dyes, and Disperse Orange 3 were the most common sensitizers. Among the 13 subjects allergic to disperse dyes alone, we found 3 cases of occupational allergic contact dermatitis, 1 child with atopic dermatitis worsening after the use of synthetic fibre garments, 4 subjects affected by clothing dermatitis, and 5 individuals occupationally exposed to irritants with a dermatitis involving the hands alone. In the latter, the hands may represent a 'locus minoris resistentiae', and both induction and elicitation of contact sensitization could be caused by impaired barrier function at a skin site repeatedly exposed to sensitizing garments.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Influence of wetness on the ultraviolet protection factor (UPF) of textiles: in vitro and in vivo measurements.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Clothing is an important product for sunburn protection and skin cancer prevention. The moisture content of a fabric, which can increase during its wearing, may decrease the fabric's capability of protecting the skin from solar UV radiation, that is, lower its UPF (ultraviolet protection factor). Due to limited data about the effect of fabric wetness on UPF, this study was undertaken to investigate the following: (a) the effect of saturating a variety of fabrics with tap water and with salt water on fabric UPF and (b) whether wetted-fabric UPF values reflect only the fact that the fabric is wet during testing or the fact that the skin is hydrated and the fabric is wet. METHODS: For objective a, 69 summer fabrics were spectrophotometrically (in vitro) assessed when "dry" and when saturated with tap and salt water. In vitro UPFs, percent UVA transmission and percent UVB transmission values were calculated from the transmission data. For objective b, 100% cotton and 100% polyester fabrics were tested in vivo to determine in vivo UPF values. The minimal erythema dose (MED) was determined for each of the 12 subjects on unprotected "dry" skin and on "hydrated" unprotected skin. MEDprotected was determined when the subject's skin was covered with "dry" and with saturated fabric. In vivo UPFs were calculated using this data. Student's paired t-tests were used to determine the effect of wetting. RESULTS: With one exception, in vitro UPF values were the same when the fabrics were saturated with tap water and when they were saturated with salt water. However, saturating the fabrics with water had different effects on the UPF, UVA transmission, and UVB transmission values. For linen, viscose and polyester fabrics, UPF significantly increased. For the cotton fabrics and the polyester + TiO2 fabrics, UPF significantly decreased. For the modal + TiO2 fabrics and the polyester crepe + TiO2 fabrics, UPF significantly increased. From the in vivo testing, the MED of the "hydrated unprotected" skin was not different than the MED of "dry unprotected skin." Values obtained from subtracting dry-fabric in vivo UPF values from dry-fabric in vitro values and subtracting wet-fabric in vivo UPF values from wet-fabric in vitro values are not different. CONCLUSION: Fabrics do not need to be tested when saturated with tap and with salt water. Testing fabrics wet and dry should be done, as the effect of saturating fabric on UPF value varies. Fortunately, UPF values for wetted fabrics reveal only the effect of increased moisture content in the fabric and have nothing to do with wetting of the skin by the fabric.

Adult↗