Improving patient care by virtual case discussion between plastic surgeons and residents of Uganda and the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

Traditional on-site missions of plastic surgeons from "high-income countries" in "low- and middle-income countries" are often limited in time and lack proper follow-up. Regular digital collaboration could lead to a more impactful and durable exchange of knowledge for plastic surgeons and residents in both settings.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the satisfaction of the first twelve months of weekly digital meetings, explore advantages/disadvantages, and to provide tools for similar initiatives.

METHODS

Weekly meetings started from August 2021. An encrypted digital connection allowed residents and plastic surgeons from Uganda and the Netherlands to discuss cases for educational purposes, where treatment options were considered. After twelve months, a survey was sent to participants from both countries to indicate the meetings' strengths, weaknesses, and possible improvements.

RESULTS

A total of 18 participants responded to the questionnaire (ten plastic surgeons, six residents, and two researchers). The strengths of the meetings were the accessibility of the meetings, knowledge exchange and practice for residents' final exams. Possible improvements included having a clear format for patient discussion, a session moderator and better internet connectivity. Moreover, a database to assess the impact of the given intervention on the patient cases by evaluating postoperatively (e.g. three months), could further improve clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

Virtual patient discussions subjectively contributed to medical education at both locations. Improved digital infrastructure and a collaborative database could further maximize learning capacity. Furthermore, digital proctoring is a promising way to establish sustainable collaborations between high- and low-resource countries.

Psychometric Performance of the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale and SCAR-Q Questionnaire in Dutch Children after Pediatric Surgery

Introduction: The growing population of survivors following pediatric surgery emphasizes the importance of long-term follow-up. The impact of surgical scars on daily life can be evaluated through patient-reported outcome measurements. The Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES) and SCAR-Q questionnaire are two interesting instruments for this purpose. We evaluated their psychometric performance in Dutch children after pediatric surgery. Methods: After English-Dutch translation, we evaluated-following the COSMIN guidelines-the feasibility, reliability (internal and external), and validity (construct, criterion, and convergent) of the SBSES and SCAR-Q in Dutch patients < 18 years old with surgical scars. Results: Three independent observers completed the SB for 100 children (58% boys, median age 7.3 (IQR 2.5-12.1) years) in whom surgery had been performed a median of 2.8 (0.5-7.9) years ago. Forty-six of these children (61% boys, median age 12.1 (9.3-16.2) years) completed the SCAR-Q. Feasibility and internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha > 0.7) was good for both instruments. For the SB, external reliability was poor to moderate (interobserver variability: ICC 0.46-0.56; intraobserver variability: ICC 0.74). For the SCAR-Q, external reliability was good (test-retest agreement: ICC 0.79-0.93). Validity tests (construct, criterion, and convergent) showed poor to moderate results for both instruments. Conclusions: The Dutch-translated SBSES and SCAR-Q showed good feasibility and internal reliability. External reliability and validity were likely affected by differences in conceptual content between the questionnaires. Combining them would provide insight in the impact of scars on patients. Implementation of these instruments in longitudinal follow-up programs could provide new insights into the long-term psychological outcome after pediatric surgery.

Topical treatment for facial burns

BACKGROUND

Burn injuries are an important health problem. They occur frequently in the head and neck region. The face is the area central to a person's identity that provides our most expressive means of communication. Topical interventions are currently the cornerstone of treatment of burns to the face.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of topical interventions on wound healing in people with facial burns of any depth.

SEARCH METHODS

In December 2019 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of topical treatment for facial burns were eligible for inclusion in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

In this first update, we included 12 RCTs, comprising 507 participants. Most trials included adults admitted to specialised burn centres after recent burn injuries. Topical agents included antimicrobial agents (silver sulphadiazine (SSD), Aquacel-Ag, cerium-sulphadiazine, gentamicin cream, mafenide acetate cream, bacitracin), non-antimicrobial agents (Moist Exposed Burn Ointment (MEBO), saline-soaked dressings, skin substitutes (including bioengineered skin substitute (TransCyte), allograft, and xenograft (porcine Xenoderm), and miscellaneous treatments (growth hormone therapy, recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor hydrogel (rhGMCS)), enzymatic debridement, and cream with Helix Aspersa extract). Almost all the evidence included in this review was assessed as low or very low-certainty, often because of high risk of bias due to unclear randomisation procedures (i.e. sequence generation and allocation concealment); lack of blinding of participants, providers and sometimes outcome assessors; and imprecision resulting from few participants, low event rates or both, often in single studies. Topical antimicrobial agents versus topical non-antimicrobial agents There is moderate-certainty evidence that there is probably little or no difference between antimicrobial agents and non-antimicrobial agents (SSD and MEBO) in time to complete wound healing (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.85, 1 study, 39 participants). Topical antimicrobial agents may make little or no difference to the proportion of wounds completely healed compared with topical non-antimicrobial agents (comparison SSD and MEBO, risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.29; 1 study, 39 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in wound infection (comparison topical antimicrobial agent (Aquacel-Ag) and MEBO; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.21; 1 study, 40 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported change in wound surface area over time or partial wound healing. There is low-certainty evidence for the secondary outcomes scar quality and patient satisfaction. Two studies assessed pain but it was incompletely reported. Topical antimicrobial agents versus other topical antimicrobial agents It is uncertain whether topical antimicrobial agents make any difference in effects as the evidence is low to very low-certainty. For primary outcomes, there is low-certainty evidence for time to partial (i.e. greater than 90%) wound healing (comparison SSD versus cerium SSD: mean difference (MD) -7.10 days, 95% CI -16.43 to 2.23; 1 study, 142 participants). There is very low-certainty evidence regarding whether topical antimicrobial agents make a difference to wound infection (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.17; 1 study, 15 participants). There is low to very low-certainty evidence for the proportion of facial burns requiring surgery, pain, scar quality, adverse effects and length of hospital stay. Skin substitutes versus topical antimicrobial agents There is low-certainty evidence that a skin substitute may slightly reduce time to partial (i.e. greater than 90%) wound healing, compared with a non-specified antibacterial agent (MD -6.00 days, 95% CI -8.69 to -3.31; 1 study, 34 participants). We are uncertain whether skin substitutes in general make any other difference in effects as the evidence is very low certainty. Outcomes included wound infection, pain, scar quality, adverse effects of treatment and length of hospital stay. Single studies showed contrasting low-certainty evidence. A bioengineered skin substitute may slightly reduce procedural pain (MD -4.00, 95% CI -5.05 to -2.95; 34 participants) and background pain (MD -2.00, 95% CI -3.05 to -0.95; 34 participants) compared with an unspecified antimicrobial agent. In contrast, a biological dressing (porcine Xenoderm) might slightly increase pain in superficial burns (MD 1.20, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.75; 15 participants (30 wounds)) as well as deep partial thickness burns (MD 3.00, 95% CI 2.34 to 3.66; 10 participants (20 wounds)), compared with antimicrobial agents (Physiotulle Ag (Coloplast)). Miscellaneous treatments versus miscellaneous treatments Single studies show low to very low-certainty effects of interventions. Low-certainty evidence shows that MEBO may slightly reduce time to complete wound healing compared with saline soaked dressing (MD -1.7 days, 95% CI -3.32 to -0.08; 40 participants). In addition, a cream containing Helix Aspersa may slightly increase the proportion of wounds completely healed at 14 days compared with MEBO (RR 4.77, 95% CI 1.87 to 12.15; 43 participants). We are uncertain whether any miscellaneous treatment in the included studies makes a difference in effects for the outcomes wound infection, scar quality, pain and patient satisfaction as the evidence is low to very low-certainty.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is mainly low to very low-certainty evidence on the effects of any topical intervention on wound healing in people with facial burns. The number of RCTs in burn care is growing, but the body of evidence is still hampered due to an insufficient number of studies that follow appropriate evidence-based standards of conducting and reporting RCTs.

[Determining depth of burns using laser Doppler imaging]

Early accurate assessment of burn depth is important to determine the optimal treatment of burns (conservative versus surgery). Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is a technique that allows accurate measurement of burn depth by measuring dermal perfusion. Although it has been demonstrated that LDI led to faster decisions as to whether or not to operate, this has not lead to shorter wound healing time or cost savings in Dutch burn care. LDI is used in all Dutch burn centres. In case of doubt about the depth of a burn in primary or secondary care, referral to a burn centre is advisable.

Return to work after specialised burn care: A two-year prospective follow-up study of the prevalence, predictors and related costs

BACKGROUND

Burn injuries may cause long-term disability and work absence, and therefore result in high healthcare and productivity costs. Up to now, detailed information on return to work (RTW) and productivity costs after burns is lacking.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to accurately assess RTW after burn injuries, to identify predictors of absenteeism and to calculate healthcare and productivity costs from a societal perspective.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted in the burn centre of Rotterdam, the Netherlands, including all admitted working-age patients from 1 August 2011 to 31 July 2012. At 3, 12 and 24 months post-burn, patients were sent a questionnaire: including the Work and Medical Consumption questionnaire for the assessment of work absence and medical consumption and the EQ-5D-3L plus a cognitive dimension to assess post-burn and pre-burn quality of life (QOL). Cost analyses were from a societal perspective according the micro-costing method and the friction cost method was applied for the calculation of productivity loss. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify predictors of absenteeism at three months.

RESULTS

A total of 104 patients were included in the study with a mean total body surface area (TBSA) burned of 8% (median 4%). 66 respondents were pre-employed, at 3 months 70% was back at work, at 12 months 92% and 8% had not returned to work at time of final follow-up at 24 months. Predictors of absenteeism at 3 months were: TBSA, length of stay, ICU-admission and surgery. Mean costs related to loss in productivity were €11.916 [95% CI 8.930-14.902] and accounted for 30% of total costs in pre-employed respondents in the first two years.

CONCLUSION

This two-year follow-up study demonstrates that burn injuries cause substantial and prolonged productivity loss amongst burn survivors with mixed burn severity. This absenteeism contributes to already high societal costs of burn injuries. Predictors of absenteeism found in this study were primarily fixed patient and treatment related factors, future studies should focus on modifiable factors, in order to improve RTW outcomes. Also, more attention in the rehabilitation trajectory is needed to optimally support RTW in burn survivors.

Long-term scar quality in burns with three distinct healing potentials: A multicenter prospective cohort study

The laser Doppler imager is used in cases of indeterminate burn depth to accurately predict wound healing time at an early stage. The laser Doppler imager classifies burns into three estimated healing potentials as follows: high, <14 days; intermediate, 14-21 days; and low, >21 days. At this time, the relationship between these healing potentials and long-term scar quality is unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the long-term scar quality of burns with three distinct healing potentials. The secondary objectives were to compare treatment strategies in intermediate wounds, to study the effect of the timing of surgery on low healing potential wounds and to identify predictors of reduced scar quality. Hence, in a prospective cohort study, scar quality was determined in patients whose burns were assessed with laser Doppler imaging. Scar Quality was assessed with objective and subjective measurement tools, including overall scar quality (Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale) as a primary outcome and color and elasticity parameters. A total of 141 patients (>19 months postburn) with 216 scars were included. Wounds with high and intermediate healing potential did not significantly differ regarding scar quality. Wounds with a low healing potential had a significantly lower scar quality. Analysis of 76 surgically treated low healing potential wounds showed no significant differences in the primary outcome regarding the timing of surgery (≤14 days vs. >14). Predictors of reduced long-term scar quality were darker skin type and multiple surgeries. In conclusion, scar quality was strongly related to the healing potential category. Scar quality was very similar in high and intermediate healing potential wounds. No positive effects were found on scar quality or on healing time in surgically treated wounds with intermediate healing potential, advocating a conservative approach. Further studies should focus on the optimal timing of surgery in low healing potential wounds.

Economic burden of burn injuries in the Netherlands: A 3 months follow-up study

INTRODUCTION

Burn care has rapidly improved in the past decades. However, healthcare innovations can be expensive, demanding careful choices on their implementation. Obtaining knowledge on the extent of the costs of burn injuries is an essential first step for economic evaluations within burn care. The objective of this study was to determine the economic burden of patients with burns admitted to a burn centre and to identify important cost categories until 3 months post-burn.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted in the burn centre of Maasstad Hospital Rotterdam, the Netherlands, including all patients with acute burn related injuries from August 2011 until July 2012. Total costs were calculated from a societal perspective, until 3 months post injury. Subgroup analyses were performed to examine whether the mean total costs per patient differed by age, aetiology or percentage total body surface area (TBSA) burned.

RESULTS

In our population, with a mean burn size of 8%, mean total costs were €26,540 per patient varying from €742 to €235,557. Most important cost categories were burn centre days (62%), surgical interventions (5%) and work absence (20%). Flame burns were significantly more costly than other types of burns, adult patients were significantly more costly than children and adolescents and a higher percentage TBSA burned also corresponded to significantly higher costs.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Mean total costs of burn care in the first 3 months post injury were estimated at €26,540 and depended on age, aetiology and TBSA. Mean total costs in our population probably apply to other high-income countries as well, although we should realise that patients with burn injuries are diverse and represent a broad range of total costs. To reduce costs of burn care, future intervention studies should focus on a timely wound healing, reducing length of stay and enabling an early return to work.

Cost study of dermal substitutes and topical negative pressure in the surgical treatment of burns

BACKGROUND

A recently performed randomised controlled trial investigated the clinical effectiveness of dermal substitutes (DS) and split skin grafts (SSG) in combination with topical negative pressure (TNP) in the surgical treatment of burn wounds. In the current study, medical and non-medical costs were investigated, to comprehensively assess the benefits of this new treatment.

METHODS

The primary outcome was mean total costs of the four treatment strategies: SSG with or without DS, and with or without TNP. Costs were studied from a societal perspective. Findings were evaluated in light of the clinical effects on scar elasticity.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients were included. Twelve months post-operatively, highest elasticity was measured in scars treated with DS and TNP (p=0.027). The initial cost price of treatment with DS and TNP was €2912 compared to treatment with SSG alone €1703 (p<0.001). However, mean total costs per patient did not differ significantly between groups (range €29097-€43774).

DISCUSSION

Costs of the interventional treatment contributed maximal 7% to the total costs and total costs varied widely within and between groups, but were not significantly different. Therefore, in the selection of the most optimal type of surgical intervention, cost considerations should not play an important role.

Cost-effectiveness of laser Doppler imaging in burn care in the Netherlands

Background

Early accurate assessment of burn depth is important to determine the optimal treatment of burns. The method most used to determine burn depth is clinical assessment, which is the least expensive, but not the most accurate.

Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is a technique with which a more accurate (>95%) estimate of burn depth can be made by measuring the dermal perfusion. The actual effect on therapeutic decisions, clinical outcomes and the costs of the introduction of this device, however, are unknown. Before we decide to implement LDI in Dutch burn care, a study on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of LDI is necessary.

Methods/design

A multicenter randomised controlled trial will be conducted in the Dutch burn centres: Beverwijk, Groningen and Rotterdam. All patients treated as outpatient or admitted to a burn centre within 5 days post burn, with burns of indeterminate depth (burns not obviously superficial or full thickness) and a total body surface area burned of ≤ 20% are eligible. A total of 200 patients will be included. Burn depth will be diagnosed by both clinical assessment and laser Doppler imaging between 2–5 days post burn in all patients. Subsequently, patients are randomly divided in two groups: ‘new diagnostic strategy’ versus ‘current diagnostic strategy’. The results of the LDI-scan will only be provided to the treating clinician in the ‘new diagnostic strategy’ group. The main endpoint is the effect of LDI on wound healing time.

In addition we measure: a) the effect of LDI on other patient outcomes (quality of life, scar quality), b) the effect of LDI on diagnostic and therapeutic decisions, and c) the effect of LDI on total (medical and non-medical) costs and cost-effectiveness.

Discussion

This trial will contribute to our current knowledge on the use of LDI in burn care and will provide evidence on its cost-effectiveness.

Trial registration

NCT01489540

Topical treatment for facial burns

BACKGROUND

Burn injuries are an important health problem. They occur frequently in the head and neck region - the area central to a person's identity, that provides our most expressive means of communication. Topical interventions are currently the cornerstone of treatment of partial-thickness burns to the face.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of topical interventions on wound healing in people with facial burns of any depth.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 12 November 2012); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 10); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to November Week 1 2012); Ovid MEDLINE - In-process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (searched November 12, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2012 Week 45); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 9 November 2012) for relevant trials. We did not apply date or language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of topical treatment for facial burns were eligible for inclusion in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed and included the references identified by the search strategy. Included trials were assessed using a risk of bias form, and data were extracted using a standardised data extraction sheet. For dichotomous and continuous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios and mean differences, respectively, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs, comprising a total of 119 participants. Two studies compared two different antimicrobial agents and three compared a biological or bioengineered skin substitute with an antimicrobial agent. All studies had small sample sizes and were at high risk of bias. Heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes prevented pooling of data. In three studies time to complete wound healing was significantly shorter for those using a skin substitute than for those using an antibacterial agent, but the quality of the evidence was low. Pain was significantly reduced with the use of skin substitutes in both studies that reported this outcome in all groups, range mean differences -2.00 (95% CI -3.82 to -0.18) to -4.00 (95% CI -5.05 to -2.95) on a 10-point scale.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient high quality research and evidence to enable conclusions to be drawn about the effects of topical interventions on wound healing in people with facial burns.

[Determining burn depth: clinical assessment and laser Doppler imaging]

Early accurate determination of burn depth is important to determine the optimal treatment of burns. The method most used to determine burn depth is clinical assessment. This is a cheap method, but not the most accurate. Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is a technique with which a more accurate (>95%) estimate of burn depth can be made by measuring the dermal perfusion. It is hypothesised that the introduction of LDI will lead to quicker decisions as to whether or not to operate, possibly leading to a shorter length of hospital stay and lower medical costs. To test this hypothesis, a multicentre randomized controlled trial is presently being conducted in the Dutch burn centres.

Ray reduction of the foot in the treatment of macrodactyly and review of the literature

Macrodactyly of the foot is a rare disorder characterized by enlargement of the soft tissue and osseous elements of the foot that impedes the development of normal function and gait. Despite the morbidity associated with this condition, many surgeons are reluctant to perform surgical reduction. In the present report, we describe 3 pediatric patients with pedal macrodactyly, who underwent surgical correction consisting of amputation of the most enlarged ray, reduction of the adjacent rays, and ray transposition, combined with debulking of soft tissues. All 3 patients subsequently developed a normal gait and were able to wear normal, or minimally adjusted, shoes. We advocate early surgical treatment of macrodactyly of the foot to enhance the development of normal function and gait.