Background: Only a few papers are published on the safety and effectiveness of acute burn care in low-income countries. A cohort study was therefore carried out to determine such outcomes.Methods: The study was conducted in a rural Tanzanian hospital in 2017-2018. All patients admitted with burns were eligible. Complications were scored during admission as an indication for safety. Survivors of severe burn injuries were evaluated for time of reepithelialization, graft take, disability (WHODAS2.0) and quality of life (EQ5D-3L) up to 3 months post-injury, as an indication of effectiveness.Results: Patients presented on average at 5 days after injury (SD 11, median 1, IQR 0-4). Three patients died at admission. The remaining 79 were included in the cohort. Their median age was 3 years (IQR 2-9, range 0.5-49), mean TBSA burned 12% (SD10%) and mortality rate 11.4%. No surgery-related mortality or life-threatening complications were observed. Skin grafting was performed on 29 patients at a delayed stage (median 23 days, IQR 15-47). Complications of skin grafts included partial (25% of procedures) and complete graft necrosis (8% of procedures). The mean time to reepithelialization was 52 (SD 42) days after admission. Disability and quality of life improved from admission to 3 months after injury (p<0.001, p<0.001, respectively).Conclusion: In this resource-limited setting patients presented after a delay and with multiple complications. The mortality during the first two weeks after admission was high. Surgery was found to be safe and effective. A significant improvement in disability and quality of life was observed.
DOCUMENT
Background: The use of patient-reported outcomes to improve burn care increases. Little is known on burn patients’ views on what outcomes are most important, and about preferences regarding online Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Therefore, this study assessed what outcomes matter most to patients, and gained insights into patient preferences towards the use of online PROMs. Methods: Adult patients (≥18 years old), 3–36 months after injury completed a survey measuring importance of outcomes, separately for three time periods: during admission, short-term (< 6 months) and long-term (6–24 months) after burn injury. Both open and closed-ended questions were used. Furthermore, preferences regarding the use of patient-reported outcome measures in burn care were queried. Results: A total of 140 patients were included (response rate: 27%). ‘Not having pain’ and ‘good wound healing’ were identified as very important outcomes. Also, ‘physical functioning at pre-injury level’, ‘being independent’ and ‘taking care of yourself’ were considered very important outcomes. The top-ten of most important outcomes largely overlapped in all three time periods. Most patients (84%) had no problems with online questionnaires, and many (67%) indicated that it should take up to 15 minutes. Patients’ opinions differed widely on the preferred frequency of follow-up. Conclusions: Not having pain and good wound healing were considered very important during the whole recovery of burns; in addition, physical functioning at pre-injury level, being independent, and taking care of yourself were deemed very important in the short and long-term. These outcomes are recommended to be used in burn care and research, although careful selection of outcomes remains crucial as patients prefer online questionnaires up to 15 minutes.
DOCUMENT
For deep partial-thickness burns no consensus on the optimal treatment has been reached due to conflicting study outcomes with low quality evidence. Treatment options in high- and middle-income countries include conservative treatment with delayed excision and grafting if needed; and early excision and grafting. The majority of timing of surgery studies focus on survival rather than on quality of life. This study protocol describes a study that aims to compare long-term scar quality, clinical outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes between the treatment options. A multicentre prospective study will be conducted in the three Dutch burn centres (Rotterdam, Beverwijk, and Groningen). All adult patients with acute deep-partial thickness burns, based on healing potential with Laser Doppler Imaging, are eligible for inclusion. During a nine-month baseline period, standard practice will be monitored. This includes conservative treatment with dressings and topical agents, and excision and grafting of residual defects if needed 14–21 days post-burn. The subsequent nine months, early surgery is advocated, involving excision and grafting in the first week to ten days post-burn. The primary outcome compared between the two groups is long-term scar quality assessed by the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale 3.0 twelve months after discharge. Secondary outcomes include clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes like quality of life and return to work. The aim of the study is to assess long-term scar quality in deep partial-thickness burns after conservative treatment with delayed excision and grafting if needed, compared to early excision and grafting. Adding to the ongoing debate on the optimal treatment of these burns. The broad range of studied outcomes will be used for the development of a decision aid for deep partial-thickness burns, to fully inform patients at the point of consent to surgery and support optimal person-centred care.
DOCUMENT
Achtergrond: In acute intensieve werksettings, waar de werkdruk al hoog was en er altijd impact is van indrukwekkende gebeurtenissen, zorgt COVID-19 voor toename van druk. Zorgprofessionals worden geconfronteerd met een nieuw en onbekend ziektebeeld, lopen risico op besmetting of om een besmettingsbron voor patiënten te zijn, communicatie met de patiënt is minder goed mogelijk, en zij krijgen te maken met een hogere werkdruk. Dit leidt tot een ongezonde werksituatie. De potentiële gevolgen hiervan zijn (post-traumatische) stress, burn-out en uitval. Er is daarom noodzaak om curatieve ondersteuning tijdens de crisis/indrukwekkende gebeurtenissen en preventieve ondersteuning ter voorbereiding op crisis/indrukwekkende gebeurtenissen en ter nazorg aan te bieden. Professionals uit het netwerk van Lectoraat Acute Intensieve Zorg werkzaam in de frontlinie vanuit ambulance, Spoedeisende Hulp (SEH), Acute Opname Afdelingen en Intensive Care geven aan moeite te hebben met het omgaan met de indrukwekkende situaties bij de COVID-19 crisis. Ze hebben gevraagd om een toolkit van werkzame interventies die kunnen worden ingezet om beter met deze situatie om te kunnen gaan om hiermee duurzame inzetbaarheid in, tijdens en na crisissituaties te vergroten. Het gaat hierbij om interventies gericht op curatieve en preventieve ondersteuning. Plan van aanpak: In dit project wordt ontwerpgericht onderzoek middels mixed methods design toegepast. In co-creatie met de praktijk ontwikkelen we een toolkit met bruikbare, zo mogelijk evidence based, interventies om zorgprofessionals te ondersteunen om om te gaan met indrukwekkende gebeurtenissen, gebaseerd op lessen uit de COVID-19 crisis. Deze toolkit dient ervoor om duurzame inzetbaarheid te ondersteunen en te vergroten. Vanuit de HAN werken de lectoraten Acute Intensieve Zorg en Human Resource Management nauw samen met beroepsverenigingen en publieke instellingen uit de acuut intensieve keten. Alle partners verspreiden ontwikkelde kennis en producten via hun netwerk.
