Reconstructive surgery after burns: a 10-year follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: There is minimal insight into the prevalence of reconstructive surgery after burns. The objective of this study was to analyse the prevalence, predictors, indications, techniques and medical costs of reconstructive surgery after burns. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in the three Dutch burn centres. Patients with acute burns, admitted from January 1998 until December 2001, were included. Data on patient and injury characteristics and reconstructive surgery details were collected in a 10-year follow-up period. RESULTS: In 13.0% (n=229/1768) of the patients with burns, reconstructive surgery was performed during the 10-year follow-up period. Mean number of reconstructive procedure per patient were 3.6 (range 1-25). Frequently reconstructed locations were hands and head/neck. The most important indication was scar contracture and the most applied technique was release plus random flaps/skin grafting. Mean medical costs of reconstructive surgery per patient over 10-years were €8342. CONCLUSIONS: With this study we elucidated the reconstructive needs of patients after burns. The data presented can be used as reference in future studies that aim to improve scar quality of burns and decrease the need for reconstructive surgery.

A clinimetric overview of scar assessment scales.

Standardized validated evaluation instruments are mandatory to increase the level of evidence in scar management. Scar assessment scales are potentially suitable for this purpose, but the most appropriate scale still needs to be determined. This review will elaborate on several clinically relevant scar features and critically discuss the currently available scar scales in terms of basic clinimetric requirements. Many current scales can produce reliable measurements but seem to require multiple observers to obtain these results reliably, which limits their feasibility in clinical practice. The validation process of scar scales is hindered by the lack of a "gold standard" in subjective scar assessment or other reliable objective instruments which are necessary for a good comparison. The authors conclude that there are scar scales available that can reliably measure scar quality. However, further research may lead to improvement of their clinimetric properties and enhance the level of evidence in scar research worldwide.