Does the estimation of burn extent at admission differ from the assessment at discharge?

Scars, burns & healing Pub Date : 2021-06-21 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20595131211019403
Sebastian Holm, Olof Engström, Ida Petäjä, Fredrik Huss
{"title":"Does the estimation of burn extent at admission differ from the assessment at discharge?","authors":"Sebastian Holm, Olof Engström, Ida Petäjä, Fredrik Huss","doi":"10.1177/20595131211019403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Estimation of total body surface area (TBSA) burnt and burn depth are among the most central parts of acute burn assessment/treatment as they determine the level and type of care needed. Traditional methods for determining burn extent on admission often lead to inaccurate estimations, especially in paediatric or overweight patients.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare %TBSA at admission with validated %TBSA at discharge in different patient populations to investigate if significant over- or underestimation occurs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This retrospective observational study is based on a patient registry of all the patients (n = 863) treated at the Uppsala University Hospital's Burn Centre between 2010 and 2018. The patients were divided into subgroups based on age, gender, body mass index (BMI) and validated burn extent. The %TBSA estimated at admission was compared to the validated %TBSA in all groups separately.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As has been published before, we also found that the %TBSA in paediatric patients was more often overestimated as were the smaller injuries, whereas larger injuries were often underestimated. BMI did not clearly affect the estimations and there was no clear difference between the genders in estimated %TBSA.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Inaccurate estimations of %TBSA are common, particularly for paediatric patients and small or large injuries. We recommend a careful accurate approach when calculating %TBSA in the paediatric population to avoid over- and under-resuscitation. Increased education and training are recommended to improve accurate estimation in the future.</p><p><strong>Lay summary: </strong>The correct estimation of both extent and depth of burn is very important. This assessment guides the lever of care needed, the necessary amount of fluid resuscitation, the predicted outcome and more. It has been proven notably difficult to correct assess, especially the extent of a burn. Despite different tools as the \"Rule of Nine\" (body area divided into multiples of 9% body surfaces), the \"Rule of Palm\" (Patient's palm, fingers included, approximates 1% of body surfaces), the Lund & Browder chart (detailed, age-specific body areas) and different more technical solutions. Often inaccurate estimations are done which thus affect the treatment. This depth and extent estimation is usually performed when the patient is admitted. However, it is known that burns change appearance during the first few days of care. In our Burn Center we have also performed this estimation when the patient is discharged. At this point it is known the true extent and depth of the initial burn. In this retrospective observational study, we compared the burn extent estimated on admission with the one on discharge to investigate whether the initial assessment is accurate. This study highlights the issue of frequent inaccurate burn extent estimations, especially in subgroups as overweight patient or pediatric patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":21495,"journal":{"name":"Scars, burns & healing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/bb/72/10.1177_20595131211019403.PMC8221698.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scars, burns & healing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20595131211019403","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Estimation of total body surface area (TBSA) burnt and burn depth are among the most central parts of acute burn assessment/treatment as they determine the level and type of care needed. Traditional methods for determining burn extent on admission often lead to inaccurate estimations, especially in paediatric or overweight patients.

Aim: To compare %TBSA at admission with validated %TBSA at discharge in different patient populations to investigate if significant over- or underestimation occurs.

Method: This retrospective observational study is based on a patient registry of all the patients (n = 863) treated at the Uppsala University Hospital's Burn Centre between 2010 and 2018. The patients were divided into subgroups based on age, gender, body mass index (BMI) and validated burn extent. The %TBSA estimated at admission was compared to the validated %TBSA in all groups separately.

Results: As has been published before, we also found that the %TBSA in paediatric patients was more often overestimated as were the smaller injuries, whereas larger injuries were often underestimated. BMI did not clearly affect the estimations and there was no clear difference between the genders in estimated %TBSA.

Conclusion: Inaccurate estimations of %TBSA are common, particularly for paediatric patients and small or large injuries. We recommend a careful accurate approach when calculating %TBSA in the paediatric population to avoid over- and under-resuscitation. Increased education and training are recommended to improve accurate estimation in the future.

Lay summary: The correct estimation of both extent and depth of burn is very important. This assessment guides the lever of care needed, the necessary amount of fluid resuscitation, the predicted outcome and more. It has been proven notably difficult to correct assess, especially the extent of a burn. Despite different tools as the "Rule of Nine" (body area divided into multiples of 9% body surfaces), the "Rule of Palm" (Patient's palm, fingers included, approximates 1% of body surfaces), the Lund & Browder chart (detailed, age-specific body areas) and different more technical solutions. Often inaccurate estimations are done which thus affect the treatment. This depth and extent estimation is usually performed when the patient is admitted. However, it is known that burns change appearance during the first few days of care. In our Burn Center we have also performed this estimation when the patient is discharged. At this point it is known the true extent and depth of the initial burn. In this retrospective observational study, we compared the burn extent estimated on admission with the one on discharge to investigate whether the initial assessment is accurate. This study highlights the issue of frequent inaccurate burn extent estimations, especially in subgroups as overweight patient or pediatric patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
入院时对烧伤程度的估计与出院时的评估是否不同?
简介:估计烧伤的总体表面积(TBSA)和烧伤深度是急性烧伤评估/治疗中最核心的部分,因为它们决定了所需护理的程度和类型。入院时确定烧伤范围的传统方法往往会导致估计不准确,尤其是对儿科或超重患者。目的:比较不同患者入院时的烧伤总面积(%TBSA)和出院时的有效烧伤总面积(%TBSA),研究是否存在明显的高估或低估:这项回顾性观察研究基于乌普萨拉大学医院烧伤中心 2010 年至 2018 年间收治的所有患者(n = 863)的登记资料。根据年龄、性别、体重指数(BMI)和验证的烧伤程度将患者分为不同的亚组。入院时估计的烧伤面积(%TBSA)与所有组别中经验证的烧伤面积(%TBSA)分别进行了比较:结果:正如之前发表的文章一样,我们也发现儿科患者的烧伤面积百分比与较小的烧伤面积百分比一样经常被高估,而较大的烧伤面积百分比则经常被低估。体重指数(BMI)对估算结果的影响并不明显,在估算的 TBSA 百分比方面,男女之间也没有明显差异:结论:TBSA%估计值不准确的情况很常见,尤其是对于儿科患者和大小创伤。我们建议在计算儿科患者的 TBSA 百分比时采用谨慎准确的方法,以避免复苏过度或复苏不足。我们建议加强教育和培训,以提高未来估计的准确性。这一评估为所需的护理杠杆、必要的液体复苏量、预后等提供指导。事实证明,正确评估尤其是评估烧伤范围非常困难。尽管有 "九分法则"(将身体面积分成 9% 体表面积的倍数)、"手掌法则"(包括手指在内的患者手掌面积近似于体表面积的 1%)、Lund & Browder 图表(详细的、按年龄划分的身体面积)等不同的工具,以及各种技术性更强的解决方案。估算结果往往不准确,从而影响治疗效果。这种深度和范围估计通常在病人入院时进行。然而,众所周知,烧伤的外观会在治疗的最初几天发生变化。在我们的烧伤中心,我们也会在病人出院时进行这种估计。此时,我们已经知道了最初烧伤的真实范围和深度。在这项回顾性观察研究中,我们将入院时估计的烧伤范围与出院时的烧伤范围进行了比较,以研究最初的评估是否准确。这项研究强调了烧伤范围估计经常不准确的问题,尤其是在超重患者或儿童患者等亚群体中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of oral Calendula officinalis on second-degree burn wound healing. To bleed or not to bleed? Case series and discussion of haemorrhage risk with enzymatic debridement in burn injuries. An evaluation of clinical psychology input into burns multidisciplinary follow-up clinics. The efficacy of combined ultrasound and electric field stimulation therapy in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Protocol for clinical diagnosis and empiric treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis in severely burned patients: observations and literature review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1