Burn Scar - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Burn Scar

The Experts below are selected from a list of 309 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Stan Monstrey – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Burn Scar assessment a systematic review of objective Scar assessment tools
    Burns, 2010
    Co-Authors: Nele Brusselaers, Stan Monstrey, Ali Pirayesh, Hendrik Hoeksema, Jozef Verbelen, Stijn Blot

    Abstract:

    Purpose: All deep second and third degree Burns are at risk to develop hypertrophic Scars which can severely undermine the quality of survival. To assess the severity of Scarring, several technical devices or tools have been introduced to evaluate one or more aspects of the Scar, enabling comparison of different treatment protocols and allowing an objective follow-up. The objective of this study was to review which tools can be used in objective Burn Scar assessment. Basic procedures: The Systematic literature search involving PubMed, the Web of Science (incl. Science Citation Index). Main findings: 51 articles with Burn Scar assessment as main topic were found. Several characteristics of the Scar can be assessed, such as color, metric features and elasticity, but none of the available tools covers the whole aspect of the Scar. Especially subjective factors such as pain and itching cannot be assessed with those tools, in spite of their great impact on the patient’s quality of life. Conclusions: Scar tools enable objective and reproducible evaluation of Scars, which is essential for scientific studies and medico-legal purposes, and in selected cases for the clinical follow-up of an individual patient. Further studies to evaluate these tools on Scars are nevertheless required.

Megan Simons – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • psychometric properties of the brisbane Burn Scar impact profile in adults with Burn Scars
    PLOS ONE, 2017
    Co-Authors: Zephanie Tyack, Megan Simons, Roy M Kimble, Steven M Mcphail, Anita Plaza

    Abstract:

    Objective
    The aim of the study was to determine the longitudinal validity, reproducibility, responsiveness and interpretability of the adult version of the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile, a patient-report measure of health-related quality of life.

    Methods
    A prospective longitudinal cohort study of patients with or at risk of Burn Scarring was conducted at three assessment points (at baseline around the time of wound healing, one to two weeks post-baseline and 1-month post-baseline). Participants attending a major metropolitan adult Burn centre at baseline were recruited. Participants completed the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey and Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs), smallest detectable change, percentage of those who improved, stayed the same or worsened and Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC) were used to test the aim.

    Results
    Data were included for 118 participants at baseline, 68 participants at one to two weeks and 57 participants at 1-month post-baseline. All groups of items had acceptable reproducibility, except for the overall impact of Burn Scars (ICC = 0.69), the impact of sensations which was not expected to be stable (ICC = 0.63), mobility and daily activities (ICC = 0.63, 0.67 respectively). The responsiveness of six out of seven groups of items able to be tested against external criterion was supported (AUC = 0.72–0.75). Hypothesised correlations of changes in the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile items with changes in criterion measures generally supported longitudinal validity (e.g., nine out of thirteen hypotheses using the SF-36 as an external criterion were supported). Internal consistency estimates, item-total and inter-item correlations indicated there was likely redundancy of some groups of items, particularly in the relationships and social interaction, appearance and emotional reactions items (Chronbach’s alpha range = 0.94–0.95).

    Conclusion
    Support was found for the reproducibility, longitudinal validity, responsiveness and interpretability of most groups of Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile items and some individual items in the test population. Potential redundancy of items should be investigated further.

  • a guide to choosing a Burn Scar rating scale for clinical or research use
    Burns, 2013
    Co-Authors: Zephanie Tyack, Megan Simons, Jason Wasiak, Anneliese Spinks, Roy M Kimble

    Abstract:

    Abstract Introduction A lack of high quality Burn Scar rating scales underpins the urgent need to introduce a guide for clinicians and researchers to choose the most appropriate scale for their requirements. Methods An updated electronic search of Medline, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases from 2010 to 2011 of a previous published systematic review were used to identify English articles related to Burn Scar rating scales. The clinimetric properties, content, purpose, characteristics of the subjects tested and feasibility of each scale were critically reviewed. Results An additional seven papers were identified by the updated search, bringing the total number of papers reviewed to 36. The majority (88%) covered items pertaining to the physical properties of the skin rated by an observer. All of the scales had been tested for the purpose of discriminating between patient groups; however, only preliminary evidence exists for the ability of the scales to measure change in Scar properties over time. The majority of testing of scales occurred using Caucasian subjects, males, upper limb sites and adults. Conclusions This paper provides a guide to selecting the most appropriate Burn Scar rating scale for research and clinical practice by reviewing the content, purpose, test sample characteristics and feasibility of each scale.

Stijn Blot – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Burn Scar assessment a systematic review of objective Scar assessment tools
    Burns, 2010
    Co-Authors: Nele Brusselaers, Stan Monstrey, Ali Pirayesh, Hendrik Hoeksema, Jozef Verbelen, Stijn Blot

    Abstract:

    Purpose: All deep second and third degree Burns are at risk to develop hypertrophic Scars which can severely undermine the quality of survival. To assess the severity of Scarring, several technical devices or tools have been introduced to evaluate one or more aspects of the Scar, enabling comparison of different treatment protocols and allowing an objective follow-up. The objective of this study was to review which tools can be used in objective Burn Scar assessment. Basic procedures: The Systematic literature search involving PubMed, the Web of Science (incl. Science Citation Index). Main findings: 51 articles with Burn Scar assessment as main topic were found. Several characteristics of the Scar can be assessed, such as color, metric features and elasticity, but none of the available tools covers the whole aspect of the Scar. Especially subjective factors such as pain and itching cannot be assessed with those tools, in spite of their great impact on the patient’s quality of life. Conclusions: Scar tools enable objective and reproducible evaluation of Scars, which is essential for scientific studies and medico-legal purposes, and in selected cases for the clinical follow-up of an individual patient. Further studies to evaluate these tools on Scars are nevertheless required.