The effect of burn severity on functional capacity in patients with burn injury.

BACKGROUND: Burns are traumatic injuries that result in severe tissue damage. A reduction in exercise capacity is the most common functional impairment, although it is not clear to what extent the severity of the burn injury affects the exercise capacity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the physiological responses to exercise and to evaluate exercise capacity according to burn severity. METHODS: The study included a total of 64 burn patients, comprising 33 with moderate injuries (Total body surface area: 9.93 ± 4.73%; mean age: 37 ± 11.93 years) and 31 with major injuries (Total body surface area: 39.03 ± 10.36%; mean age: 41.09 ± 14.96 years). Heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, double product, dyspnea level, oxygen saturation and leg fatigue before and after the shuttle walk test were recorded. Walking distances were measured after the shuttle walk test. RESULTS: A significant difference was determined between patients with major and moderate burn injuries in respect of the cardiovascular responses to the shuttle walk test. Major burn injury patients had a significantly shorter walking distance than the moderate burn injury patients (p< 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Burn injury severity was seen to affect the functional capacity and cardiovascular responses to the shuttle walk test. Shuttle walk test can be preferred to evaluate moderate and major burn injury patients' functional capacity in the acute period of injury.

Can we make an early 'do not resuscitate' decision in severe burn patients?

BACKGROUND: The present study was conducted to examine topic of issuing early do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order at first diagnosis of patients with severe burn injuries in light of current law in Turkey and the medical literature. DNR requires withholding cardiopulmonary resuscitation in event of respiratory or cardiac arrest and allowing natural death to occur. It is frequently enacted for terminal cancer patients and elderly patients with irreversible neurological disorders. METHODS: Between January 2009 and December 2014, 29 patients (3.44%) with very severe burns were admitted to burn unit. Average total burn surface area (TBSA) was 94.24% (range: 85-100%), and in 10 patients, TBSA was 100%. Additional inhalation burns were present in 26 of the patients (89.65%). All of the patients died, despite every medical intervention. Mean survival was 4.75 days (range: 1-24 days). Total of 17 patients died within 72 hours. Lethal dose 50 (% TBSA at which certain group has 50% chance of survival) rate of our burn center is 62%. Baux indices were used for prognostic evaluation of the patients; mean total Baux score of the patients was 154.13 (range: 117-183). RESULTS: It is well known that numerous problems may be encountered during triage of severely burned patients in Turkey. These patients are referred to burn centers and are frequently transferred via air ambulance between cities, and even countries. They are intubated and mechanical ventilation is initiated at burn center. Many interventions are performed to treat these patients, such as escharotomy, fasciotomy, tangential or fascial excision, central venous catheterization and tracheostomy, or hemodialysis. Yet despite such interventions, these patients die, typically within 48 to 96 hours. Integrity of the body is often lost as result of aggressive intervention with no real benefit, and there are also economic costs to hospital related to use of materials, bed occupancy, and distribution of workforce. For these reasons, as well as patient comfort, early do-not-resuscitate or do-not-intubate protocol for these patients is suggested. Resources could then be directed to other patients with high expectancy of life and patients with burns that are beyond treatment can experience more comfortable end of life. CONCLUSION: At present in Turkey, it is not possible to give DNR order for patient with severe burns that are incompatible with survival due to legal interdiction. This subject should be discussed at high-level meetings with participation of doctors, legal experts, economists, and theologians.

Clinical evaluation of a temporary fecal containment device for non-surgical fecal diversion in perineal burns.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical results of a temporary fecal containment device (Flexi-Seal® FMS) in our burn center. METHODS: All patients in whom temporary fecal containment devices were applied for perineal burns between August 2008 and August 2009 in our institution were reviewed. Demographics, etiology of burns, total body surface area (TBSA) burned, intensive care unit (ICU) need, early mortality, and post-application data were obtained from a prospectively designed database. In addition, some variables were investigated as potential risks factors for fecal leakage. RESULTS: The mean age of patients (n=15) was 43.1±22.1 years, and 66.7% of the patients were male. The mean %TBSA burned was 40.7±16.6. Fecal leakage was seen in 6 patients. Local infection in the perineum was observed in 6 patients, including 4 of the 6 patients with fecal leakage. The mortality rate was 33% (5 deaths). All exitus patients had 50% or more TBSA burned. Electrical burn injury was found as a significant risk factor for fecal leakage in surviving patients (p<0.05). Autologous split-thickness grafting was performed in 8 patients without complication. The mean duration of catheterization was 22.5±5.7 days. Except for superficial mucosal erosion in the distal rectum in 2 cases, no complication was observed. The mean hospitalization time was 46.7±12.7 days. CONCLUSION: If the safety of these devices is proven in further prospective, high-volume studies, they may reduce the necessity of diverting stoma operation in burn patients.