Accuracy of commercial reporting systems to monitor quality of care in burns

Revalidating the prognostic relevance of the Abbreviated Burn Severity Index (ABSI): A twenty-year experience examining the performance of the ABSI score in consideration of progression and advantages of burn treatments from a single center in Vienna

BACKGROUND

The Abbreviated Burn Severity Index (ABSI) is a five-variable scale to help evaluate burn severity upon initial assessment. As other studies have been conducted with comparatively small patient populations, the purpose of this study is to revalidate the prognostic relevance of the ABSI in our selected population (N = 1193) 4 decades after its introduction, considering the progress in the treatment of severe burn injuries over the past decades. In addition, we evaluate whether comorbidities influence the survival probability of severely burned patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study presents data from the Center for Severely Burned Patients of the General Hospital in Vienna. We included 1193 patients for over 20 years. Regression models were used to describe the prognostic accuracy of the ABSI.

RESULTS

The ABSI can still be used as a prognostic factor for the probability of survival of severely burned patients. The odds of passing increases by a factor of 2.059 for each unit increase in the ABSI with an area under the curve value of 0.909. Over time, the likelihood of survival increased. The existence of chronic kidney disease negatively impacts the survival probability of severely burned patients.

CONCLUSION

The ABSI can still be used to provide accurate information about the chances of survival of severely burned patients; however, further exploration of the impact of chronic kidney disease on the survival probability and adding variables to the ABSI scale should be considered. The probability of survival has increased over the last 20 years.

Quality indicators for hospital burn care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Burn treatments are complex, and for this reason, a specialised multidisciplinary approach is recommended. Evaluating the quality of care provided to acute burn patients through quality indicators makes it possible to develop and implement measures aiming at better results. There is a lack of information on which indicators to evaluate care in burn patients. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify a list of quality indicators used to evaluate the quality of hospital care provided to acute burn patients and indicate possible aspects of care that do not have specific indicators in the literature.

METHOD

A comprehensive scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) was conducted in four databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Lilacs/VHL) between July 25 and 30, 2022 and redone on October 6, 2022. Potentially relevant articles were evaluated for eligibility. General data and the identified quality indicators were collected for each included article. Each indicator was classified as a structure, process, or outcome indicator.

RESULTS

A total of 1548 studies were identified, 82 were included, and their reference lists were searched, adding 19 more publications. Thus, data were collected from 101 studies. This review identified eight structure quality indicators, 72 process indicators, and 19 outcome indicators listed and subdivided according to their objectives.

CONCLUSION

This study obtained a list of quality indicators already used to monitor and evaluate the hospital care of acute burn patients. These indicators may be useful for further research or implementation in quality improvement programs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework platform on June 27, 2022 ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/NAW85 ).

Comparison of prognostic models for burn patients: A retrospective nationwide registry study

BACKGROUND

Prognostic burn index (PBI) is a unique model utilized to predict mortality of burn patients in Japan. In contrast, other prediction models are rarely used in Japan, and their accuracy and predictive value are unknown. The present study aimed to compare commonly used burn prediction models and determine the appropriate model for mortality prediction in Japanese burn patients.

METHODS

Japanese burn patients registered in the nationwide burn registry of Japanese Society for Burn Injury between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2019 were reviewed retrospectively. The prognostic performance of PBI was compared with Baux score, revised Baux score, abbreviated burn severity index (ABSI), Ryan score and Belgian outcome in burn injury score (BOBI). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

The study included 7911 acute burn patients. The overall mortality rate was 10.7%, the median age was 52 (interquartile range, 26-72) years, and the median % total body surface area was 7% (interquartile range, 3%-17%). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for PBI, Baux score, ABSI, revised Baux score, Ryan score, and BOBI were 0.940 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.931-0.948), 0.943 (95% CI: 0.934-0.951; p=0.002), 0.945 (95% CI: 0.937-0.953; p=0.058), 0.946 (95% CI: 0.937-0.953; p=0.002), 0.859 (95% CI: 0.846-0.870; p<0.001), and 0.896 (95% CI: 0.885-0.905; p<0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although the performance of PBI was good, it was not superior to the Baux score, revised Baux score, and ABSI. These three scores have a high prognostic accuracy. Hence, they are considered as alternative burn prognostic scores in Japan. The Baux score was an optimal prognostic model for patients with burns in Japan.

Review of Burn Research for Year 2014

Management of burn injuries requires treatments and interventions from many disciplines. Worldwide, burn patients suffer from physical and psychological challenges that impact their lives socially and economically. In this review, we will highlight a handful of the numerous articles published in multiple areas of burn care. The areas of burn care addressed in the article are: epidemiology; burn resuscitation, critical care, and infection; nutrition and metabolism; pain and rehabilitation; prevention and firefighter safety; psychology; and reconstruction and wounds.

Standardised mortality ratio based on the sum of age and percentage total body surface area burned is an adequate quality indicator in burn care: An exploratory review

Standardised Mortality Ratio (SMR) based on generic mortality predicting models is an established quality indicator in critical care. Burn-specific mortality models are preferred for the comparison among patients with burns as their predictive value is better. The aim was to assess whether the sum of age (years) and percentage total body surface area burned (which constitutes the Baux score) is acceptable in comparison to other more complex models, and to find out if data collected from a separate burn centre are sufficient for SMR based quality assessment. The predictive value of nine burn-specific models was tested by comparing values from the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and a non-inferiority analysis using 1% as the limit (delta). SMR was analysed by comparing data from seven reference sources, including the North American National Burn Repository (NBR), with the observed mortality (years 1993-2012, n=1613, 80 deaths). The AUC values ranged between 0.934 and 0.976. The AUC 0.970 (95% CI 0.96-0.98) for the Baux score was non-inferior to the other models. SMR was 0.52 (95% CI 0.28-0.88) for the most recent five-year period compared with NBR based data. The analysis suggests that SMR based on the Baux score is eligible as an indicator of quality for setting standards of mortality in burn care. More advanced modelling only marginally improves the predictive value. The SMR can detect mortality differences in data from a single centre.

Do standard burn mortality formulae work on a population of severely burned children and adults?

Accurate prediction of mortality following burns is useful as an audit tool, and for providing treatment plan and resource allocation criteria. Common burn formulae (Ryan Score, Abbreviated Burn Severity Index (ABSI), classic and revised Baux) have not been compared with the standard Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHEII) or re-validated in a severely (≥20% total burn surface area) burned population. Furthermore, the revised Baux (R-Baux) has been externally validated thoroughly only once and the pediatric Baux (P-Baux) has yet to be. Using 522 severely burned patients, we show that burn formulae (ABSI, Baux, revised Baux) outperform APACHEII among adults (AUROC increase p<0.001 adults; p>0.5 children). The Ryan Score performs well especially among the most at-risk populations (estimated mortality [90% CI] original versus current study: 33% [26-41%] versus 30.18% [24.25-36.86%] for Ryan Score 2; 87% [78-93%] versus 66.48% [51.31-78.87%] for Ryan Score 3). The R-Baux shows accurate discrimination (AUROC 0.908 [0.869-0.947]) and is well-calibrated. However, the ABSI and P-Baux, although showing high measures of discrimination (AUROC 0.826 [0.737-0.916] and 0.848 [0.758-0.938]) in children), exceedingly overestimates mortality, indicating poor calibration. We highlight challenges in designing and employing scores that are applicable to a wide range of populations.