Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Experimental models of scald burns. A scope review
Menegat, Taís Amadio; Oliveira, Andrea Fernandes de; Majewski, Michelle Gioia Coiado; Blanes, Leila; Juliano, Yara; Novo, Neil Ferreira; Ferreira, Lydia Masako.
Afiliação
  • Menegat, Taís Amadio; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Department of Surgery. Division of Plastic Surgery. Brazil
  • Oliveira, Andrea Fernandes de; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Brazil
  • Majewski, Michelle Gioia Coiado; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. School of Medicine. Brazil
  • Blanes, Leila; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Brazil
  • Juliano, Yara; Universidade Santo Amaro. Biostatistics Department. São Paulo. Brazil
  • Novo, Neil Ferreira; Universidade Santo Amaro. Biostatistics Department. São Paulo. Brazil
  • Ferreira, Lydia Masako; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Division of Plastic Surgery. São Paulo. Brazil
Acta cir. bras. ; 34(10): e201901007, 2019. ilus, tab
Article em En | VETINDEX | ID: vti-24036
Biblioteca responsável: BR68.1
Localização: BR68.1
ABSTRACT

Purpose:

To conduct a scope review of the experimental model described by Walker and Mason, by identifying and analyzing the details of the method.

Methods:

The authors searched Pubmed-Medline, Cochrane-Bireme and PEDro databases for articles published between January 2016 and December 2018, using the following search queries burns, burn injuries, models animal, and animal experimentation. All articles whose authors used Walker and Mason's model - with or without changes to the method in Wistar rats - were included in this study.

Results:

The search identified 45 mentions of Walker and Mason's model; however, after reading each summary, 20 were excluded (of which 5 due to duplicity). The inconsistencies observed after the scope review were water temperature, length of time of exposure of the experimental model's skin to water, extent of the burnt area, and the description of the thickness/depth of the injury.

Conclusions:

Reproducibility of a scientific method is the basis to prove the veracity of the observed results. Thus, it is necessary to have a greater number of publications that adopt a reproducible scientific method, for this review found inconsistencies in the description of Walker and Mason's model.(AU)
Assuntos
Palavras-chave