TABLE 2.

Included studies evaluating the influence of an atopic predisposition

					Conclusion
Intervention	Substance	Population, sex	Measurement	Author/year/location	Clinical outcome	Skin physiological measurements
Repetitive semi‐occlusive patch test	Sterillium (45% 2‐propanol, 30% 1‐propanol, 0,2% mecetronium etylsulfate) Sterillium pure (45% 2‐propanol, 30% 1‐propanol, 0,2% mecetronium etylsulfate) Sterillium Gel (85% ethanol) Sterillium Virugard (95% ethanol) Amphisept E (80% ethanol)	54 (45F, 9M) 26 of them Atopics with Erlangen Atopy score of 12.1 ±3.1	Visual assessment by one investigator Chromameter	Kampf et al/ 2006/Germany 42	Mean tolerability with five hand rubs was between 0.01 ±0.03 and 0.02± 0.1 which is identical to the mean tolerability of the negative control (0.02±0.07)	Skin redness was between 0.01±0.1 and 0.28±1.0, similar to the negative control. No difference between atopic and non‐atopic subjects could be made
Occlusion‐modified tandem repeated irritation test	n‐propanol (30%, 45%, 60%, 75% aq.)	20 (16F, 4M) healthy 20 (17F, 3M) atopic dermatitis	Tewameter Corneometer Colorimetry NMF	Angelova‐Fischer et al/2020/ Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Croatia 44		Cumulative exposure to 30% n‐propanol, applied as a single irritant, was sufficient to induce damage to the epidermal barrier in atopics, whereas the same exposure had no significant effect on healthy skin, unless the barrier function had been previously impaired

Note: F, female; M, male; NMF, natural moisturising factor.