Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries
-
In 2009, the Burns Registry of Australia and New Zealand (BRANZ) published a set of clinical quality indicators (QIs) to monitor performance, improve quality of care, and inform and change policy. With several years of data collected since the initial development of the indicators for burns, the BRANZ QI Working Party reviewed the clinical QIs for relevance and meaning, and considered new QIs that had not been collected previously. ⋯ This review outlines the changes made to the QIs collected by the BRANZ four years since their development and implementation. Ongoing refinement of the BRANZ QIs will ensure that high quality data is collected to drive improvements in clinical and patient outcomes.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
The efficacy of resistance training in addition to usual care for adults with acute burn injury: A randomised controlled trial.
Resistance training immediately after a burn injury has not been investigated previously. This randomised, controlled trial assessed the impact of resistance training on quality of life plus a number of physical, functional and safety outcomes in adults with a burn injury. Patients were randomly assigned to receive, in addition to standard physiotherapy, four weeks of high intensity resistance training (RTG) or sham resistance training (CG) three days per week, commenced within 72h of the burn injury. ⋯ Total quality of life scores, lower limb disability, muscle strength and volume were not seen to be different between groups (p>0.05). Resistance training in addition to usual rehabilitation therapy showed evidence of improving functional outcomes, particularly in upper limb burn injuries. Additionally, resistance training commenced acutely after a burn injury was not seen to be harmful to patients.
-
Multicenter Study
Mortality prognostication scores do not predict long-term, health-related quality of life after burn: A burn model system national database study.
Despite improved mortality rates after burn injury, many patients face significant long-term physical and psychosocial disabilities. We aimed to determine whether commonly used mortality prognostication scores predict long-term, health-related quality of life after burn injury. By doing so, we might add evidence to support goals of care discussions and facilitate shared decision-making efforts in the hours and days after a life-changing injury. ⋯ Higher revised Baux and Ryan Scores negatively correlated with long-term physical health, but not mental health, after burn injury. Regardless, the models poorly explained the variance in SF-12 scores one year after injury. More accurate models are needed to predict long-term, health-related quality of life and support shared decision-making during acute burn care.
-
Many websites giving first aid advice are disappointingly inaccurate and at times dangerous in regard to burn injuries. With more patients relying on their smart phones to obtain online information the aim of this study was to compare first aid applications (apps) burn advice against those guidelines set by the British Burns Association (BBA). ⋯ Burns first aid is documented as being poorly given in the community. With easy access to the internet and specifically smart device apps, more needs to be done to improve burn first aid information online.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
A study comparing the effect of premedication with intravenous midazolam or dexmedetomidine on ketamine-fentanyl sedoanalgesia in burn patients: A randomized clinical trial.
Dressing changes and wound care-debridement procedures often cause fear and anxiety in burn patients, as these processes are quite painful. In order to determine the best method for alleviating pain during these procedures, the current study compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous dexmedetomidine and midazolam for premedication prior to these painful burn care procedures. ⋯ Results of this study indicate that dexmedetomidine causes hemodynamic alterations while midazolam causes respiratory depression. However, these effects are not severe, and we conclude that both agents are safe and effective to ensure sedation prior to painful burn-care procedures.