INTRODUCTION: It is difficult to adjust fluid balance adequately in patients with severe burns due to various physical changes. B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) is emerging as a potential marker of hydration state. Proteinuria is used as a predictor of outcome in severe illness and might correlate to systemic capillary leakage. This study investigates whether combining BNP and proteinuria can be used as a guide for individualized resuscitation and as a predictor of outcome in patients with severe burns.METHODS: From 2006 to 2009, 38 consecutive patients (age 47 ± 15 years, 74% male) with severe burns were included and followed for 20 days. All had normal kidney function at admission. BNP and proteinuria were routinely measured. Ordered and actually administered fluid resuscitation volumes were recorded. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was used as the measure of outcome.RESULTS: BNP increased during follow-up, reaching a plateau level at Day 3. Based on median BNP levels at Day 3, patients were divided into those with low BNP and those with high BNP levels. Both groups had comparable initial SOFA scores. Patients with high BNP received less fluid from Days 3 to 10. Furthermore, patients with a high BNP at Day 3 had less morbidity, reflected by lower SOFA scores on the following days. To minimize effects of biological variability, proteinuria on Days 1 and 2 was averaged. By dividing the patients based on median BNP at Day 3 and median proteinuria, patients with high BNP and low proteinuria had significantly lower SOFA scores during the entire follow-up period compared to those patients with low BNP and high proteinuria.CONCLUSIONS: Patients with higher BNP levels received less fluid. This might be explained by a lower capillary leakage in these patients, resulting in more intravascular fluid and consequently an increase in BNP. In combination with low proteinuria, possibly reflecting minimal systemic capillary leakage, a high BNP level was associated with a better outcome. BNP and proteinuria have prognostic potential in severely burned patients and may be used to adjust individual resuscitation.
BACKGROUND: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is increasingly implemented in healthcare worldwide. Transparent measurement of the outcomes most important and relevant to patients is essential in VBHC, which is supported by a core set of most important quality indicators and outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a VBHC-burns core set for adult burn patients.METHODS: A three-round modified national Delphi study, including 44 outcomes and 24 quality indicators, was conducted to reach consensus among Dutch patients, burn care professionals and researchers. Items were rated on a nine-point Likert scale and selected if ≥ 70% in each group considered an item 'important'. Subsequently, instruments quantifying selected outcomes were identified based on a literature review and were chosen in a consensus meeting using recommendations from the Dutch consensus-based standard set and the Dutch Centre of Expertise on Health Disparities. Time assessment points were chosen to reflect the burn care and patient recovery process. Finally, the initial core set was evaluated in practice, leading to the adapted VBHC-burns core set.RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients, 63 burn care professionals and 23 researchers participated. Ten outcomes and four quality indicators were selected in the Delphi study, including the outcomes pain, wound healing, physical activity, self-care, independence, return to work, depression, itching, scar flexibility and return to school. Quality indicators included shared decision-making (SDM), the number of patients receiving aftercare, determination of burn depth, and assessment of active range of motion. After evaluation of its use in clinical practice, the core set included all items except SDM, which are assessed by 9 patient-reported outcome instruments or measured in clinical care. Assessment time points included are at discharge, 2 weeks, 3 months, 12 months after discharge and annually afterwards.CONCLUSION: A VBHC-burns core set was developed, consisting of outcomes and quality indicators that are important to burn patients and burn care professionals. The VBHC-burns core set is now systemically monitored and analysed in Dutch burn care to improve care and patient relevant outcomes. As improving burn care and patient relevant outcomes is important worldwide, the developed VBHC-burns core set could be inspiring for other countries.
Patients with extensive and complex wounds due to Necrotizing Soft-Tissue Infections (NSTI) may be referred to a burn center. This study describes the characteristics, outcomes, as well as diagnostic challenges of these patients. Patients admitted to three hospitals with a burn center for the treatment of NSTI in a 5-year period were included. Eighty patients (median age 54 years, 60% male) were identified, of whom 30 (38%) were referred by other centers, usually after survival of the initial septic phase. Those referred from other centers, compared to those primarily admitted to the study hospitals, were more likely to have group A streptococcal involvement (62% vs 35%, p = .02), larger wounds (median 7% vs 2% total body surface area, p < .001), and a longer length of stay (median 49 vs 22 days, p < .001). Despite a high incidence of septic shock (50%), the mortality rate was low (12%) for those primarily admitted. Approximately half (53%) of the patients were initially misdiagnosed upon presentation, which was associated with delay to first surgery (16 hours vs 4 hours, p < .001). Those initially misdiagnosed had more (severe) comorbidities, and less frequently reported pain or blue livid discoloration of the skin. This study underlines the burn centers' function as referral centers for extensively affected patients with NSTI. Besides the unique wound and reconstructive expertise, the low mortality rate indicates these centers provide adequate acute care as well. A major remaining challenge remains recognition of the disease upon presentation. Future studies in which factors associated with misdiagnosis are explored are needed.
