PURPOSE: Describe prevalence and severity of fatigue in children and adolescents with burns during six months after hospital discharge, identify potential explanatory variables, and examine the relationship with exercise capacity.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fatigue was assessed using the Pediatric-Quality-of-Life-Inventory-Multidimensional-Fatigue-Scale (PedsQL-MFS) at discharge, and six weeks, three-, and six months after discharge. PedsQL-MFS scores ≥1 SD below the age-group specific non-burned reference mean were considered to signify fatigue.RESULTS: Twenty-two children and adolescents (13 boys/9 girls, age 6-18 years, with burns covering 2-34% of total body surface area) were included. The prevalence of fatigue decreased from 65% (11/17) at discharge to 28% (5/18) six months after discharge. At group level, fatigue severity decreased over time, reaching healthy reference values from six weeks after discharge and beyond. At individual level, the course of fatigue severity varied widely. Fatigue severity at six months after discharge could not be predicted by age, sex, or burn severity (p = 0.51, p = 0.58, p = 0.95, respectively). The association with exercise capacity was weak (r = 0.062-0.538).CONCLUSIONS: More than a quarter of pediatric burn patients reported fatigue six months after discharge. Further research in larger populations is required, including also the impact of burn-related fatigue on daily functioning and quality of life.Trial registration number: OND1353942Implications for rehabilitationFatigue should be recognized as a potential consequence of (pediatric) burns, even several months post burnFatigue should be assessed regularly after discharge in all children and adolescents with burns, as it seems not possible to predict its severity from age, sex, or burn severity characteristicsThe weak association between exercise capacity and self-reported fatigue suggests that burn-related fatigue is not simply a consequence of a reduced exercise capacity.
Background: Outcome assessment is essential to understand the impact and recovery of burns of the hand and tailor treatment. There is however, a large variety of measures and outcome assessment is often incomplete. The aim was therefore to initiate a set of outcome assessments for use in a clinical setting. Method: A concept set was drafted, based on the framework of the International Classification of Functioning, which distinguished two phases, three patient states and included both patient reported and clinical outcomes. Subsequently, potential assessments were allocated to the various outcomes. This concept was discussed during the European Burns Association congress in 2013 and revised. The revision was sent to 65 colleagues from 28 institutions, accompanied by a survey. Results: Eleven surveys were returned from 16 persons representing 9 institutions from 6 countries. Based on the feedback, final revisions were made. Points raised were time investment and translations of not all assessments already available. Conclusions: With multidisciplinary and international input, a multidimensional set of outcome assessments for burns of the hand has been established, covering almost all domains of functioning. This first step towards more uniform clinical evaluation, will contribute to knowledge on outcome and effectiveness of treatment of hand burns.
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)).
