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
Scar formation is an important adverse consequence of burns. How patients appraise their scar quality is often studied shortly after sustaining the injury, but information in the long-term is scarce. Our aim was, therefore, to evaluate long-term patient-reported quality of burn scars. Adults with a burn center admission of ≥1 day between August 2011 and September 2012 were invited to complete a questionnaire on long-term consequences of burns. We enriched this sample with patients with severe burns (>20% total body surface area [TBSA] burned or TBSA full thickness >5%) treated between January 2010 and March 2013. Self-reported scar quality was assessed with the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). Patients completed this scale for their—in their opinion—most severe scar ≥5 years after burns. This study included 251 patients with a mean %TBSA burned of 10%. The vast majority (91.4%) reported at least minor differences with normal skin (POSAS item score ≥2) on one or more scar characteristics and 78.9% of the patients’ overall opinion was that their scar deviated from normal skin. Patients with severe burns had higher POSAS scores, representing worse scar quality, than patients with mild/intermediate burns, except for color, which was high in both groups. A longer hospital stay predicted reduced scar quality (both mean POSAS and mean overall opinion of the scar) in multivariate analyses. In addition, female gender was also associated with a poorer overall opinion of the scar. In conclusion, this study provides new insights in long-term scar quality. Scars differed from normal skin in a large part of the burn population more than 5 years after burns, especially in those with severe burns. Female gender is associated with a poorer patients’ overall opinion of their scar, which may be an indication of gender differences in perception of scar quality after burns.
DOCUMENT
Background: Burden of disease estimates are an important resource in public health. Currently, robust estimates are not available for the burn population. Our objectives are to adapt a refined methodology (INTEGRIS method) to burns and to apply this new INTEGRIS-burns method to estimate, and compare, the burden of disease of burn injuries in Australia, New Zealand and the Netherlands. Methods: Existing European and Western-Australian health-related quality of life (HRQL) datasets were combined to derive disability weights for three homogenous burn injury groups based on percentage total body surface area (%TBSA) burned. Subsequently, incidence data from Australia, New Zealand, and the Netherlands from 2010 to 2017 were used to compute annual non-fatal burden of disease estimates for each of these three countries. Non-fatal burden of disease was measured by years lived with disability (YLD). Results: The combined dataset included 7159 HRQL (EQ-5D-3 L) outcomes from 3401 patients. Disability weights ranged from 0.046 (subgroup <5% TBSA burned > 24 months post-burn) to 0.497 (subgroup > 20% TBSA burned 0-1 months post-burn). In 2017 the non-fatal burden of disease of burns for the three countries (YLDs/100,000 inhabitants) was 281 for Australia, 279 for New Zealand and 133 for the Netherlands. Conclusions: This project established a method for more precise estimates of the YLDs of burns, as it is the only method adapted to the nature of burn injuries and their recovery. Compared to previous used methods, the INTEGRIS-burns method includes improved disability weights based on severity categorization of burn patients; a better substantiated proportion of patients with lifelong disability based; and, the application of burn specific recovery timeframes. Information derived from the adapted method can be used as input for health decision making at both the national and international level. Future studies should investigate whether the application is valid in low- and middle- income countries.
DOCUMENT
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify the prevalence and development of after burn joint limitation by scar contracture.METHODS: In 2011-2012, consecutive patients were enrolled in this prospective multi center cohort study. Eligible were all patients admitted to the 2 participating Dutch Burn Centers with acute burns across or adjacent to the neck, shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee and ankle. Passive range of motion was measured in week 3 and subsequently every 3 weeks until discharge, on discharge from the hospital and during follow-up at the outpatient clinic at 3-6-9-12 months after burn.RESULTS: Limited range of motion of non-operated burned joints (N = 195) was restored back to normal within 6-9 months. From the operated burned joints (N = 353), 58.6% demonstrated a limited range of motion at 3-6 weeks declining to 20.9% at 12 months. The upper part of the body was affected more often by scar contracture than the lower part. At 12 months, the shoulder was limited most often (51.3%) and the hip least often (0%). Reconstructive surgery was performed in 13.3% of the operated burned joints.CONCLUSIONS: Persistent joint limitations at 12 months were exclusively present in joints that needed skin grafting for rapid wound closure. The upper part of the body was more prone to contracture formation than the lower part, from which the shoulder was most often involved. More than half of the limited range of motion seen in the acute phase, resolved in the long term. The need for reconstructive surgery was less than expected.
DOCUMENT
An important aspect of the rehabilitation of burn patients is social participation, including daily activities and work. Detailed information on long-term activity impairment and employment is scarce. Therefore, we investigated activity impairment, work status, and work productivity loss in adults 5-7 years following burn injuries, and investigated associations with burn-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) domains. Adult participants completed the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment General Health questionnaire and the Burn Specific Health Scale-brief (BSHS-B) 5-7 years post-burn. Outcomes were compared between participants with mild/intermediate and severe burns (>20% total body surface area burned). Seventy-six (36%) of the 213 participants experienced some degree of activity impairment due to burn-related problems 5-7 years post-burn. Seventy percent of the population was employed; 12% of them experienced work productivity loss due to burn-related problems. Nineteen percent reported changes in their work situation (partly) because of the burn injury. A higher proportion of participants with severe burns had activity impairments (56% vs 29%; P = .001) and work productivity loss (26% vs 8%; P < .001) compared to participants with mild/intermediate burns. Activity impairment and work productivity loss were both associated with burn-related work problems and lower mood, measured with the BSHS-B. In conclusion, a substantial part of the study population experienced activity impairment and work productivity loss, was unemployed, and/or reported changes in their work situation due to their injury. Particularly patients with severe burns reported productivity loss and had lower employment rates. This subscribes the importance of addressing work-related functioning in the rehabilitation of burn patients.
DOCUMENT
Background: Frailty can have a negative influence on outcomes in elderly patients after burn injuries. The Dutch hospitals have used a four-domain frailty screening instrument from the Dutch Safety Management System (DSMS) since 2012. However, its feasibility and validity have hardly been studied. We aim to assess the feasibility and validity of frailty screening in specialized burn care. Methods: A multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted in all Dutch burn centres. Patients aged ≥ 70, with a primary admission between 2012-2018, were included. Data were derived from electronic patient files. Results: In total, 515 patients were included. Frailty screening was complete in 39.6% and partially complete in 23.9%. Determinants for a complete screening were admission after 2015 (OR = 2.15, 95% CI 1.42-3.25) and lower percentage TBSA burned (OR = 0.12, 95% CI 0.05-029). In all completely screened patients, 49.9% were at risk of frailty. At risk patients were older, had more comorbidities (known group validity), a longer length of stay, and more frequently a non-home discharge (predictive validity). Conclusion: Frailty screening in specialized burn care is feasible and was conducted in 63.5% of admitted patients. In total, 44% of screened patients were at risk of frailty. Validity of frailty screening was confirmed. Frailty screening can contribute to optimal specialized burn care.
DOCUMENT
Background: Burn scar maturation can take several years but is generally studied shortly after injury. Therefore, we investigated patient-reported scar quality up to 5–7 years post-burn. Methods: Patients with ≤ 20 % total body surface area burned completed the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS 2.0) on the same scar at 3, > 18 months (median 28 months) and 5–7 years (median 63 months) post-burn. Results: Fifty-eight patients (21 children; 37 adults) with a median total body surface area burned (TBSA) of 6.3 % participated. Average patient-reported scar quality (POSAS score) was generally worst at 3 months (median score: 4.2), best at 28 months (median score: 2.2) and intermediate at 63 months post-burn (median score: 3.4) (p < 0.001). Many patients (66 %) reported a median 1.8 point higher (worse) POSAS score at 63 months compared to 28 months post-burn, whereas 14 % reported an identical, and 21 % a lower (better) score. At any assessment, largest differences with normal skin were reported for scar colour. Univariate predictive factors of long-term patient-reported scar quality were scar quality at 3 months (p = 0.002) and 28 months post-burn (p < 0.001), full-thickness burn size (p = 0.033), length of hospital stay (p = 0.003), and number of surgeries (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Two-thirds of patients with burns up to 20 % TBSA scored the quality of their scars worse at 63 months compared to 28 months post-burn. Whether this corresponds to increased dissatisfaction with scars in the long term should be further investigated. These new insights add to the body of knowledge on scar maturation and underscores the importance of discussing patients’ expectations.
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 (
DOCUMENT
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 population of elderly patients with burn injuries is growing. Insight into long-term mortality rates of elderly after burn injury and predictors affecting outcome is limited. This study aimed to provide this information.METHODS: A multicentre observational retrospective cohort study was conducted in all three Dutch burn centres. Patients aged ≥65 years, admitted with burn injuries between 2009 and 2018, were included. Data were retrieved from electronic patient records and the Dutch Burn Repository R3. Mortality rates and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess predictors for in-hospital mortality and mortality after discharge at 1 year and five-year. Survival analysis was used to assess predictors of five-year mortality.RESULTS: In total, 682/771 admitted patients were discharged. One-year and five-year mortality rates were 8.1 and 23.4%. The SMRs were 1.9(95%CI 1.5-2.5) and 1.4(95%CI 1.2-1.6), respectively. The SMRs were highest in patients aged 75-80 years at 1 year (SMRs 2.7, 95%CI 1.82-3.87) and five-year in patients aged 65-74 years (SMRs 10.1, 95%CI 7.7-13.0). Independent predictors for mortality at 1 year after discharge were higher age (OR 1.1, 95%CI 1.0-1.1), severe comorbidity, (ASA-score ≥ 3) (OR 4.8, 95%CI 2.3-9.7), and a non-home discharge location (OR 2.0, 95%CI 1.1-3.8). The relative risk of dying up to five-year was increased by age (HR 1.1, 95%CI 1.0-1.1), severe comorbidity (HR 2.3, 95%CI 1.6-3.5), and non-home discharge location (HR 2.1, 95%CI 1.4-3.2).CONCLUSION: Long-term mortality until five-year after burn injury was higher than the age and sex-matched general Dutch population, and predicted by higher age, severe comorbidity, and a non-home discharge destination. Next to pre-injury characteristics, potential long-lasting systemic consequences on biological mechanisms following burn injuries probably play a role in increased mortality. Decreased health status makes patients more prone to burn injuries, leading to early death.
DOCUMENT
