A Leeds community pharmacist who believes that he has developed eczema from contact with new inks used on National Health Service prescription forms has placed the matter in the hands of his solicitors (PJ, September 25, p473).
Mr Robert Dunkley told The Journal on December 7 that since his initial report, which had also been included in two medical magazines, he had been contacted by practice managers on behalf of their staff in three locations in the United Kingdom. One correspondent had developed a rash on her forehead as a result of brushing her hair out of her eyes while dealing with prescriptions. A total of 21 cases involving pharmacists or dispensers and nine involving receptionists, practice managers, general medical practitioners and practice nurses had been reported.
Mr Dunkley said that the reactions varied in severity, with some people having to take time off work. One receptionist had been hospitalised because of the severity of the attack. In another case, the individual had required bronchodilator treatment before she could handle prescription forms because of the vapour they gave off.
Prescription pricing staff, according to Mr Dunkley, had reported severe headaches when the forms were first introduced, although this had worn off in time.
Three variants of the FP10 form are involved in Mr Dunkley's investigation. Form FP10 Rev98 had been the worst and was, in Mr Dunkley's view, responsible for initial sensitisation. The culprit, he believes, was an ink used as an anti-copying measure. According to the NHS Executive, the ink had been removed from form FP10 12/98, but noone who had contacted Mr Dunkley had said that their condition had improved.
Mr Dunkley said that there were too few of the latest forms, FP10 0899, in circulation to be able to judge if they were going to improve the situation.