Reproducibility of patch test reactions is an important aspect of patch testing. Thin layer rapid use epicutaneous tests (TRUE TestTM) are preloaded with allergen, whereas Finn Chambers® are empty discs that have allergen applied from a syringe. The amount of allergen applied to each Finn Chamber® is therefore potentially variable depending on technique. This may increase the risk of non‐reproducibility of reactions. We have performed an audit of patch test preparation in our department looking at weight variation of both individual Finn Chambers® and 3 completed panels before and after allergen application. We found that the variance in weight was not significant for 2 of the 3 panels and single Finn Chambers® with allergen in petrolatum. The variance in weight was significant for single Finn Chambers® with allergen in solution and the third panel, which contains an allergen in solution. The clinical significance of these results is unclear.

Contact DermatitisVolume 41, Issue 3 p. 162-163 Pentaerythritol-esterified gum rosin as a sensitizer in Granuflex® hydrocolloid dressing ANTHONY M. R. DOWNS, ANTHONY M. R. DOWNS Department of Dermatology, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol BS2 8HW, UKSearch for more papers by this authorLESLEY A. SHARP, LESLEY A. SHARP Department of Dermatology, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol BS2 8HW, UKSearch for more papers by this authorJANE E. SANSOM, JANE E. SANSOM Department of Dermatology, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol BS2 8HW, UKSearch for more papers by this author ANTHONY M. R. DOWNS, ANTHONY M. R. DOWNS Department of Dermatology, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol BS2 8HW, UKSearch for more papers by this authorLESLEY A. SHARP, LESLEY A. SHARP Department of Dermatology, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol BS2 8HW, UKSearch for more papers by this authorJANE E. SANSOM, JANE E. SANSOM Department of Dermatology, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol BS2 8HW, UKSearch for more papers by this author First published: 14 February 2007 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1999.tb06110.xCitations: 20AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article. References 1 Hausen B M. Ein geigenharz mit geringer sensibilisierungspotenz. Akt Dermatol 1990: 16: 32– 33. 2 Shao L P, Gafvert E, Karlberg A T et al. The allergenicity of glycerol esters and other esters of rosin (colophony). Contact Dermatitis 1993 28: 229– 234. 3 Mallon E, Powell S M. Allergic contact dermatitis from Granuflex hydrocolloid dressing. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 30: 110– 111. 4 Hausen B M, Mohnert J. Contact allergy due to colophony (V). Contact Dermatitis 1989: 20: 295– 330. 5 Karlberg A T, Boman A, Nilsson J L G. Hydrogenation reduces the allergenicity of colophony (rosin). Contact Dermatitis 1988 19: 22– 29. Citing Literature Volume41, Issue3September 1999Pages 162-163 ReferencesRelatedInformation