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
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: Physical activity is essential in burn care to counteract the effects of severe burns and inactivity during hospitalization. However, detailed knowledge of performed physical activities is lacking. This study evaluated the feasibility of a dual accelerometer-based method to assess type, frequency, and duration of physical activity in critically ill burn patients during hospitalization.METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted at the burn center of the Martini Hospital, Groningen, The Netherlands. Eligible were patients with a total body surface area (TBSA) burned of ≥ 15 % or an indication for intensive care. Patients wore two accelerometers, one on the chest and one on the diagonally opposite thigh. An algorithm converted accelerometer data into type, frequency, and duration of activities common for intensive care patients. An activity diary was used to assess non-wear time and its content, e.g., surgery.RESULTS: Five patients (20-60 years, 13-31 % TBSA burned, LOS 30-65 days) were included. Per patient, 14-49 days (17,380-61,796 min) could be analyzed of which 7-14 % was non-wear time. During wear time, 86-95 % of activities could be identified and quantified. However, processing the data was labor-intensive.CONCLUSION: The dual accelerometer-based method proved feasible for research purposes. For clinical application, further refinement of data processing is required.
DOCUMENT
Background: As the assistive and resistive properties of water can facilitate the performance of exercise, aquatic exercise therapy might be a promising rehabilitation modality for burn patients. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and acceptability of aquatic exercise therapy in adult burn patients with an indication for supervised exercise therapy. Methods: Eligible for this observational pilot study were all competent adult burn patients with an indication for supervised exercise therapy who had been admitted to the burn centre of the Maasstad Hospital between June 2016 and February 2017. Patients were asked to participate in an in-hospital aquatic exercise therapy program for a minimum of 2 weeks, 2 times per week, or otherwise serve as control by having land-based exercise therapy (regular care). Feasibility of aquatic exercise therapy was assessed by comparing the number of eligible patients to the number of patients that could actually participate, monitoring attendance rates, monitoring complications, and evaluating early experiences. Acceptability was assessed using the Water Exercise Acceptability Questionnaire. Results: Eleven patients were invited and ten of them agreed to participate. All chose aquatic instead of land-based exercise therapy. Participants were aged between 19 and 64 years and their burns affected 18–53% of total body surface area (TBSA). Aquatic exercise therapy appeared feasible in nine of 13 eligible patients (69%). Attendance rates were high (42–100%) and the majority of participants (n = 9) continued with aquatic exercise therapy beyond the initial two weeks. No serious complications (e.g. infections) occurred. Adverse symptoms (wound healing issues) were reported in five participants, but in four of them these were not likely to be due to the aquatic exercise therapy. Enjoyment was high and adherence to the aquatic exercise therapy was further facilitated by support from staff, a sense of achievement, noticeable improvements, personal motivation, and support from other participants. Peer support was reported as a positive side effect. Conclusions: These preliminary results indicate that aquatic exercise therapy is both feasible and acceptable for the majority of adult burn patients with an indication for supervised exercise therapy. No indications were found for an increased risk of infection or other serious complications.
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: 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
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
A substantial proportion of patients with burn injury develop chronic itch, which can severely affect their quality of life. As found in research on chronic pain, different psychophysiological processes may also play a role in chronic itch, of which central sensitization, conditioned modulation, and attentional processes have been studied most frequently. This study aimed to explore psychophysiological processes of chronic post-burn itch by comparing 15 patients with long-term itch due to burn injury with 15 matched healthy controls. Exploratory results indicated tendencies for higher itch sensitivity in patients than in controls, for mechanical stimuli and histamine, but not for electrical stimulation. Results further suggest that the efficacy of itch modulation by an itch- or pain-conditioning stimulus or directing attention towards itch stimuli do not differ between these patients and controls. Further elucidation of the processes underlying post-burn itch may improve the early identification and treatment of burn patients developing chronic itch.
DOCUMENT
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the prevalence and predictors of reconstructive surgery among pediatric burn patients in the Netherlands.METHODS: Pediatric burn patients were identified through the Dutch Burn Repository R3. Eligibility criteria included a burn requiring hospital admission or surgical treatment at one of the Dutch burn centers in 2009-2019. First, patient, burn, and treatment characteristics were summarized using descriptive statistics. Second, time to the first reconstructive surgery was modelled using Kaplan Meier curves. Third, a prediction model was developed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. The model's performance was assessed using calibration, discrimination, and explained variance. Fourth, internal validation was performed using bootstrapping.RESULTS: Approximately three percent (n = 84) of pediatric patients (n = 3072) required reconstructive surgery between the initial burn-related hospital admission and September 2021. Median time to the first reconstructive surgery was 1.2 (0.7-1.6) years. Most surgeries were performed on the face, arm, neck, hand, or anterior trunk, owing to contractures or hypertrophic scarring. Predictors of reconstruction included the etiology, anatomical site, extent of full-thickness burn, surgical treatment in the acute phase, and length of hospital stay.CONCLUSION: Our study provided an overview of the prevalence and independent predictors of reconstructive surgery in the pediatric burn population.
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
