Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing the Outpatient Treatment of Pediatric and Adult Partial-Thickness Burns with Suprathel or Mepilex Ag.
Modern treatment of partial-thickness burns follows the paradigm of less frequent dressing changes to allow for undisturbed reepithelialization of the burn wound. We compared Mepilex Ag (M), a silver-impregnated foam dressing, and Suprathel (S), a DL-lactid acid polymer, in the outpatient treatment of partial-thickness burns in pediatric and adult patients. Patients were enrolled in a randomized, controlled, prospective clinical trial. ⋯ The cost of treatment per square centimeter for Mepilex Ag was considerably lower than that of Suprathel. Both dressings are feasible and efficacious for the outpatient treatment of minor and selected moderate partial-thickness burns. Reduced pain, especially in a pediatric patient population, may be advantageous, despite increased treatment cost.
-
The objectives of this study were to identify trends in preburn center care, assess needs for outreach and education efforts, and evaluate resource utilization with regard to referral criteria. We hypothesized that many transferred patients were discharged home after brief hospitalizations and without need for operation. Retrospective chart review was performed for all adult and pediatric transfers to our regional burn center from July 2012 to July 2014. ⋯ In-hospital mortality rates were 1.5% for patients who arrived by ground transport, 14.9% for rotor wing transport, and 18.2% for fixed wing transport. Future education efforts should emphasize the importance of calculating TBSA to guide need for fluid resuscitation and restricting fluid boluses to patients that are hypotensive. Clarifying the American Burn Association burn center referral criteria to distinguish between immediate transfer vs outpatient referral may improve patient care and resource utilization.
-
The Burn Specific Health Scale-Brief (BSHS-B) is one of the most commonly used instruments to measure quality of life after burns. Our aim was to establish and to provide a German version of the BSHS-B for all German-speaking burn facilities. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the original English version into the German language was conducted. ⋯ The confirmatory factor analyses revealed the best model fit for the second-order 3-factor structure, excluding the Work domain. The Ludwigshafen German version of the BSHS-B shows good psychometric properties. It is well suited for clinical use, further research, and international comparison.
-
Accurate determination of burn size significantly impacts both immediate management and long-term outcome. In the era of evidence-based medicine, the variability in TBSA% assessment shown by traditional methods may prove unacceptable and technology-aided systems become the "accepted standard." The objective of this study was to push this scenario to the limit by investigating the accuracy and consistency of TBSA% estimations using a computer-aided tool. Five Laymen (health care-burn management naïve people) were trained on the handling of the technology-aided assessment tool Burn Case 3D© and asked to calculate TBSA% for 18 clinical pictures of burns with different patterns and sizes. ⋯ Laymen's calculations were also more consistent (mean SD, 0.95%). The Professionals showed a generalized significant overestimation of TBSA% as compared with the Laymen's calculations (up to 198.5%). Innovative software provide a high potential to improve objectivity and quality of burn assessment in the future.
-
Prompt debridement of burns and early grafting increase survival rates while reducing morbidity and length of hospitalization. Among the debridement methods, hydrosurgery is gaining popularity during the last decade. This review aims to review all available clinical evidence regarding the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of the hydrosurgical management of burns. ⋯ There is fair and limited evidence (level III) concerning the cost-effectiveness of the method. Although there is increasing evidence on the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of hydrosurgery in burns, large-scale prospective randomized control trials with long-term follow-up are necessary to establish the superiority of the method over conventional surgical debridement in terms of selectivity of removed tissues, reduced necessity for dressings and reoperations, healing time, engraftment, and scar quality. All cost-influencing dynamics of this per se expensive modality need to be thoroughly analyzed to resolve its cost-saving potential.