• Burns · Nov 2013

    Review

    Predicting length of stay in thermal burns: A systematic review of prognostic factors.

    • Amer Hussain and Ken W Dunn.
    • University Hospital South Manchester, Southmoor Road, Manchester M23 9LT, United Kingdom. Electronic address: amh@doctors.net.uk.
    • Burns. 2013 Nov 1; 39 (7): 1331-40.

    BackgroundContinued improvement in all aspects of the management of thermal injury has resulted in marked improvements in the traditionally reported outcome of mortality. This has resulted in the search for alternative parameters that can be monitored to indicate the performance of burn services. Length of stay (LOS) in hospitalised burn patients has long been considered reflective of injury-associated morbidity, cost and the quality of care, which can be monitored consistently across services.AimWe undertook a systematic review of published literature pertaining to LOS prognostication in thermal burns to identify the relevant factors, quantify the risk associated with these factors and identify predictive prognostic models.MethodsElectronic searches were performed on MEDLINE, CINHAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane collection and a general web search was performed using Google. The searches were complemented by a manual search of the contents of leading burns journals. Quality of the studies included in the review was evaluated against published standards for prognostic studies.ResultsFourteen studies were included in the review after meeting the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Age and %TBSA were the strongest predictors of LOS in these studies. Other significant predictors included % full thickness burn, female gender, inhalation injury, surgery including escharotomy and the depth of burn. Nine studies reported multivariate models for predicting LOS in patients sustaining thermal injury. None of these models were validated and the goodness-of-fit statistic (R2) ranged from 0.15 to 0.75.ConclusionThis review has demonstrated that %TBSA and age are the best predictors of LOS in published literature. Current prognostic models do not explain a significant proportion of variation in LOS.Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.