Objectives: Since January 2015, squamous cell carcinoma or multiple actinic keratosis of the skin caused by natural ultraviolet irradiation (UVR) is recognized as occupational disease in Germany. Interventions which improve the sun protection behavior of outdoor workers are urgently needed. When developing preventive interventions, the attitudes of target groups need to be taken into consideration. Therefore, outdoor workers’ perceptions and attitudes were investigated. Methods: Seven guided, problem-centered qualitative interviews with healthy male outdoor workers were conducted. A qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data. Results: We found an underestimation of the perceived skin cancer risk in the seven outdoor workers and heterogeneous attitudes toward the usage of sun-protective measures. Participants stated that the feasibility of technical sun-protective measures depends on the size of the working area. While using a headgear seemed common, none of the participants stated using additional neck protection. Wearing long-sleeved shirts and long trousers were considered problematic. The interviews revealed important requirements for sun-protective clothes, especially in terms of different materials. Although the usage of sunscreen was common, our interviewees seemed to apply it wrongly. Conclusion: Risk perceptions of outdoor workers and their attitudes toward sun protection measures may influence the factual UV protection behavior in the workplace. Structures to facilitate the implementation of technical and organizational sun-protective measures seem to be necessary. Educational interventions and clear instructions which are tailored to the individual needs and attitudes of outdoor workers are required to improve the UV protection behavior and to avoid common mistakes.

Background: Eczematous skin diseases, e.g., atopic dermatitis or contact dermatitis, are associated with a high disease burden, a significant impact on quality of life and a higher risk for anxiety and depression. Therefore, coping strategies are of interest. In order to understand coping processes, it is necessary to examine the patients’ perspectives on their illness. The aim of this systematic mixed studies review is to investigate the illness perceptions of patients with eczematous skin diseases to get a better understanding of their coping processes.Methods: We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, PSYNDEX, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus until February 20, 2019. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included in the review. Two independent reviewers conducted data extraction and carried out a narrative synthesis. We assessed study quality with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.Results: Three qualitative and four quantitative studies were included in the systematic review. We found different methodological approaches for investigating illness perceptions: guided interviews, focus group interviews as well as standardized questionnaires, e.g., the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. All studies report suspected causes of the skin disease, such as endogenous and exogenous causes (namely, psychological or occupational factors). We found long timeline beliefs as well as various perceived and experienced social, economic, and psychological consequences. Our analysis reveals complex emotional representations in patients with eczematous skin diseases, in particular impairment of emotional well-being, and feelings of shame or helplessness. Qualitative and quantitative data were predominantly complementary and convergent.Conclusion: Patients with eczematous skin diseases have complex illness representations regarding their disease. These representations interrelate with the coping behavior of patients. Therefore, medical professionals should consider them for counseling and treatment.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 2018CRD42018109217.

Skin cancer has become a substantial matter of public health and in the workplace, accounting for a significant share of all reported occupational diseases. The most important external factor in the development of skin cancer is exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation. Outdoor workers have already been identified as a high-risk category. The need for interventions to improve the sun protection behavior of outdoor workers has recently been understood. Outdoor workers' risk perceptions and attitudes toward sun protection methods are likely to influence practical sun protection behavior at work, and despite the fact that many workers have expressed interest in improving their sun protection behavior, outdoor workers' unique needs are still neglected. Occupational dermatology is predicted to become more concerned with photoprotection in the decades ahead. Preventive action against the rapidly increasing number skin cancer cases is in great demand around the globe. In terms of preventive measures, the full range of available options should be used as needed to address the current difficulties in a goal-oriented way. This will almost certainly only be achievable if preventative efforts on a collective and individual level are successfully paired with support from policymakers to inspire long-term change.

Background: Outdoor workers (OW) are highly exposed to solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and thus at increased risk for developing skin cancer. An essential part of an overall strategy to reduce workplace UVR-exposure to OW’s skin is the usage of sunscreens. However, compliance with regular sunscreen usage seems to be low, as products are usually designed for recreational sun exposure and thus do not meet the requirements of physically active OW. To date, no standardized test procedures assess the suitability of sunscreens for professional use. The aim of this pilot study was to develop standardized methods of testing secondary performance attributes (PA) to represent real-life working conditions of outdoor work. Methods: Ten sunscreen products, carefully selected after a detailed market survey of all relevant producers available on the German market, were evaluated regarding their suitability for professional outdoor work on 24 healthy volunteers in a newly designed test procedure. In addition to three standardized efficacy characteristics, i.e., sun protection factor, water-resistance, and UVA protection, we evaluated each PA involving parameters typically associated with outdoor workplaces. Results: We developed standardized methods for objectifying the suitability of sunscreen products for professional outdoor work. The test procedures used are well feasible and appropriate for testing the PA because they represent practical working conditions in detail – although the degree of discriminability of single test methods varied. The claimed sun protection factor (SPF) of the products was confirmed; bio-stability of the SPF after physical activity was achieved in most cases. While most products hardly irritate the eyes and are quickly absorbed, the evaluation of the subjective skin feeling and non-slip grip is inconsistent. Conclusions: In this pilot study, for the first time secondary PA are defined and examined. Although further objectification of the PA assessment as well as the establishment of minimum standards should be sought, the new methods could already complement the so far mandatory labels and in this way provide a significant impetus for the current scientific and political focus on the improvement of occupational health in highly UVR-exposed OW.

In Germany, work-related skin diseases are predominant within the spectrum of reported occupational diseases. Metal workers are among the high-risk professions. Offering effective prevention programs to affected patients is of utmost importance to avoid deterioration of the disease and job loss. We conducted a 1-year follow-up in patients who participated in a multidisciplinary, complex outpatient prevention program representing a standard procedure of patient care by the respective statutory accident insurance. The multi-component prevention program consists of multiprofessional individual patient counseling, a structured skin protection seminar in a group, as well as workplace visits and on-site counseling in terms of appropriate skin protection (e.g. gloves). An observational study with a 1-year follow-up and four measurements (T1-T4, longitudinal pre/post-test design) including dermatological examinations and standardized written questionnaires was conducted between 2013 and 2016 to assess changes over time regarding job loss and disease severity. Data from 94 patients (87 male, mean age: 45.4 years) were included in the analysis. One year after the skin protection seminar (T4), 83 patients (88.3%) remained in their original professional metalworking activity and four patients (4.3%) had given up their profession because of their skin disease. At baseline (T1), irritant contact dermatitis of the hands was the most frequent diagnosis (80.7%). Methods for self-reported disease severity showed good correlation with the clinical gold standard at T1 and T2 (dermatological examination with the Osnabrück Hand Eczema Severity Index / OHSI), and a significant decrease of the self-reported disease severity was found over time from T1 to T4 (p < 0.001). Further results indicate an improved self-perceived disease control and an overall satisfaction with the prevention program. The results of this observational study demonstrate that the comprehensive prevention program positively influences the course of work-related skin diseases, increases the possibility to continue working in a “high-risk” profession and improves the disease management of metal workers. In the long term, the prevention program may lead to cost savings by preventing high therapy costs or professional retraining.