Epidemiological and Clinical Profile of Work-related Dermatoses in the Artisanal Fishing Ports of Conakry, Guinea: A Cross-sectional Study
Résumé fourni par la source
Objective: Was to describe the epidemiological and clinical profile of dermatoses in workers in artisanal fishing ports in Conakry. Materials and Methods: The study was a cross-sectional and descriptive in nature, lasting 17 months. Workers with active or remitting dermatosis were included. A multidisciplinary medical observation (occupational physicians and dermatologists) was made of each worker. Results: The study focused on 396 workers in artisanal fishing ports who had dermatosis in artisanal fishing ports in Conakry with an average age of 39 years and a male predominance of 72.5%. Fishermen represented the most affected professionals with 65.6%. Erythema and keratosis were the dominant dermatological lesions, 45.9% and 35.3% respectively. Traumatic dermatoses were encountered in 90.9% with an involvement of the hands of 70.7% and the feet of 26.5%. Among the etiologies identified on the lesions, the bite of the jaw dominated with 51.9%. Almost all (99%) of the workers of the artisanal fishing ports had no qualified professional training in the matter against 44.9% who used gloves and 16.2%, helmets. Conclusion: Dermatoses in the artisanal port environment are urgent as a significant health problem among workers. The establishment of a research orientation plan focused on working conditions and medical surveillance will allow a better understanding of safety and health issues in this area.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Epidemiological and Clinical Profile of Work-related Dermatoses in the Artisanal Fishing Ports of Conakry, Guinea: A Cross-sectional Study
- Date Crossref
- 25/09/2024
- Éditeur
- Sciencedomain International
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.