{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.046341463414634146, 'fraction_numerical': 0.030894308943089432, 'mean_word_length': 4.946859903381642, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from 3‐dimethylaminopropylamine in shampoos

Case Report A non-atopic woman, born in 1958, had worked as an assistant nurse since 1984. Without earlier skin symptoms, she developed dermatitis on both hands in 1992. Her dermatitis disappeared in 2 to 3 weeks on sick leaves, but relapsed at work. She was patch tested with a standard series, a series of antimicrobials, and a cosmetics series. Nickel allergy was verified, but otherwise the tests were negative. Her hand dermatitis was considered to be occupational irritant contact dermatitis. The patient left her job because of the hand dermatitis, and started to study. Since then she had had occasional relapses of hand dermatitis. She was referred to us in 1996. She was patch tested (5) with a modified European standard series (omitting nickel sulfate), a series of antimicrobials, and a series of cosmetics, including cocamidopropy1betaine (CAPB), oleamidopropyl dimethylamine, 3-D MAPA and coconut diethanolamide. The only allergic patch test reaction was provoked by 3-DMAPA (Aldrich-Chemie, Steinheim, Germany, reported purity >99%) 1% pet. (02 +, 03 +, 04 ++)(Fig. 1). 3-DMAPA had been in our cosmetics series in November 1995.