Purpose: This research aimed to explore factors associated with patient-reported breast and abdominal scar quality after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction (BR). Material and Methods: This study was designed as a descriptive cross-sectional survey in which women after DIEP flap BR were invited to complete an online survey on breast and abdominal scarring. The online survey was distributed in the Netherlands in several ways in order to reach a diverse population of women. Outcomes were assessed with the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). Additional items were assessed with a numeric rating scale (NRS). Results: A total of 248 women completed the survey. There was a statistically significant worse POSAS scar appraisal for the abdominal scar compared with the breast scar. The vast majority of women reported high scores on at least one scar characteristic of their breast scar or ab- dominal scar. Overall, color, stiffness, thickness, and irregularity scored higher than pain and itching. Women were only moderately positive about the size, noticeability, location, and the information provided regarding scarring. Conclusion: It is crucial to address the inevitability of scars in patient education before a DIEP flap BR, with a particular focus on the abdominal scar, as women experience abdominal scars significantly worse than their breast scars. Providing more information on the experience of other women and the expected appearance will contribute to having realistic expectations while allowing them to make well-informed decisions.
DOCUMENT
Breast cancer is the most prevalent form of cancer that affects women worldwide, posing a significant burden on public health. While advancements in early detection and improved treatments have led to a remarkable 90% five-year survival rate and an 83% ten-year survival rate, this has also resulted in more prophylactic mastectomies being performed. Despite advancements in breast-conserving techniques, immunotherapy, and hormone therapy, many women still undergo mastectomies as part of their cancer treatment. In all cases, this results in scarring, and additional side effects from treatment modalities may arise. The loss of a breast can profoundly impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although HRQoL has improved greatly during the recent years, systematic and local therapy having side effects is not uncommon, and this needs more attention.
DOCUMENT
Purpose The purpose of this research was to explore women’s experiences after breast surgery with scar characteristics and symptoms, and its impact on their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Material andmethods A qualitative study using semi-structured face-to-face interviewswas conducted among women following prophylactic, oncologic, or reconstructive breast surgery in the Netherlands. A directed content analysis was performed using guiding themes. Themes were “physical and sensory symptoms,” “impact of scar symptoms,” “personal factors,” “impact of scar interventions,” and “change over time.” Results The study population consisted of 26 women after breast surgery. Women experienced a wide range of symptoms like adherence, stiffness, pain, and uncomfortable sensations. Scar characteristics as visibility, location, texture, and size, influenced satisfaction with their appearance. The impact of scar symptoms is reflected in physical, social, emotional, and cognitive functioning, thereby affecting HRQOL. The experienced impact on HRQOL depended on several factors, like personal factors as the degree of acceptance and environmental factors like social support. Conclusion Women can experience a diversity of scar characteristics and symptoms, which play a central role in the perceived impact on HRQOL. Since scarring can have a considerable impact on HRQOL, scarring after prophylactic, oncologic and reconstructive breast surgery should be given more attention in clinical practice and research. Implications for Cancer Survivors Considering scarring as a common late effect after breast surgery and understanding the variety of experiences, which could impact HRQOL of women, can be beneficial in sufficient information provision, expectation management, and informed decision making.
DOCUMENT
Background: Deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction leads to large scars in the breast and abdominal region. Common symptoms related to abdominal scarring include changes in color, stiffness, thickness, and irregularity of the skin. The aim of this study was to examine whether microneedling improves the abdominal scar quality after DIEP-flap breast reconstruction. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled within subject comparison design (N = 30) was used to study the effect of microneedling treatments on the abdominal scar, versus no treatment. Three electrically powered microneedling sessions were performed every 4 weeks on one side of the abdominal scar. Abdominal scar assessment was performed at baseline and 3-, 6-, and 9-month follow-up using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). Treated and untreated sides were compared using a t test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test in case the data were not normally distributed. Results: Twenty-seven women completed the study. Microneedling treatment led to lower POSAS scores compared with the untreated scar side after the 3- and 9-month follow-up. At the 9-month follow-up, the POSAS total score (Mdn = 17, interquartile range = 18.3 versus Mdn = 21.4, interquartile range = 17.5) was statistically lower for the treated side compared with the untreated side, implying a better-appraised scar quality. The observer POSAS total score was statistically lower for the treated side compared with the untreated side. Conclusions: Based on patient and observer ratings, overall abdominal scars after DIEP-flap surgery improve significantly after microneedling treatment. Scar symptoms reduce faster under the influence of microneedling treatment compared with no treatment.
LINK
Acne vulgaris is considered one of the most common medical skin conditions globally, affecting approximately 85% of individuals worldwide. While acne is most prevalent among adolescents between 15 to 24 years old, it is not uncommon in adults either. Acne addresses a number of different challenges, causing a multidimensional disease burden. These challenges include clinical sequelae, such as post inflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH) and the chance of developing lifelong disfiguring scars, psychological aspects such as deficits in health related quality of life, chronicity of acne, economic factors, and treatment-related issues, such as antimicrobial resistance. The multidimensionality of the disease burden stipulates the importance of an effective and timely treatment in a well organised care system. Within the Netherlands, acne care provision is managed by several types of professional care givers, each approaching acne care from different angles: (I) general practitioners (GPs) who serve as ‘gatekeepers’ of healthcare within primary care; (II) dermatologists providing specialist medical care within secondary care; (III) dermal therapists, a non-physician medical professional with a bachelor’s degree, exclusively operating within the Australian and Dutch primary and secondary health care; and (IV) beauticians, mainly working within the cosmetology or wellness domain. However, despite the large variety in acne care services, many patients experience a delay between the onset of acne and receiving an effective treatment, or a prolonged use of care, which raises the question whether acne related care resources are being used in the most effective and (cost)efficient way. It is therefore necessary to gain insights into the organization and quality of Dutch acne health care beyond conventional guidelines and protocols. Exploring areas of care that may need improvement allow Dutch acne healthcare services to develop and improve the quality of acne care services in harmony with patient needs.
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
Background: Tangential excision of burned tissue followed by skin grafting is the cornerstone of burn surgery. Hydrosurgery has become popular for tangential excision, with the hypothesis that enhanced preservation of vital dermal tissue reduces scarring. The aim of this trial was to compare scar quality after hydrosurgical versus conventional debridement before split-skin grafting. Methods: A double-blind randomized within-patient multicentre controlled trial was conducted in patients with burns that required split-skin grafting. One wound area was randomized to hydrosurgical debridement and the other to Weck knife debridement. The primary outcome was scar quality at 12 months, assessed with the observer part of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). Secondary outcomes included complications, scar quality, colour, pliability, and histological dermal preservation. Results: Some 137 patients were randomized. At 12 months, scars of the hydrosurgical debrided wounds had a lower POSAS observer total item score (mean 2.42 (95 per cent c.i. 2.26 to 2.59) versus 2.54 (95 per cent c.i. 2.36 to 2.72; P = 0.023)) and overall opinion score (mean 3.08 (95 per cent c.i. 2.88 to 3.28) versus 3.30 (95 per cent c.i. 3.09-3.51); P = 0.006). Patient-reported scar quality and pliability measurements were significantly better for the hydrosurgically debrided wounds. Complication rates did not differ between both treatments. Histologically, significantly more dermis was preserved with hydrosurgery (P < 0.001). Conclusion: One year after surgery scar quality and pliability was better for hydrosurgically debrided burns, probably owing to enhanced histological preservation of dermis. Registration number: Trial NL6085 (NTR6232 (http://www.trialregister.nl)).
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
Background: Acne vulgaris is a multifaceted skin disorder, affecting more than 85% of young individuals worldwide. Pharmacological therapy is not always desirable because of the development of antibiotic resistance or the potential risk of adverse effects. Non‐pharmacological therapies can be viable alternatives for conventional therapies. However, sufficient evidence‐based support in the efficacy and safety of non‐pharmacological therapies is lacking. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of several non‐pharmacological therapies in the treatment of acne vulgaris. Methods: A systematic literature review, including a best‐evidence synthesis, was performed to identify literature. Three electronic databases were accessed and searched for studies published between January 2000 and May 2017. Results: Thirty‐three eligible studies were included in our systematic review. Three main types of non‐pharmacological therapies were identified laser‐ and light‐based therapies, chemical peels and fractional microneedling radiofrequency. The majority of the included studies demonstrated a significant reduction in acne lesions. However, only seven studies had a high methodologic quality. Based on these seven trials, a best‐evidence synthesis was conducted. Strong evidence was found for glycolic acid (10–40%). Moderate evidence was found for amino fruit acid (20–60%), intense pulsed light (400–700 and 870–1200 nm) and the diode laser (1450 nm). Initially, conflicting evidence was found for pulsed dye laser (585–595 nm). The most frequently reported side‐effects for non‐pharmacological therapies included erythema, tolerable pain, purpura, oedema and a few cases of hyperpigmentation, which were in most cases mild and transient. Conclusion: Circumstantial evidence was found for non‐pharmacological therapies in the treatment of acne vulgaris. However, the lack of high methodological quality among included studies prevented us to draw clear conclusions, regarding a stepwise approach. Nevertheless, our systematic review including a best‐evidence synthesis did create order and structure in resulting outcomes in which a first step towards future research is generated.
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
