Reliability of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in Evaluating Linear Scars after Thyroidectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the reliability of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) with the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) in evaluating thyroidectomy scars. METHODS: At 6 months after the operation, 112 patients who underwent thyroid surgery via collar neck incision were evaluated by two blinded plastic surgeons and two senior residents using the VSS and the observer component of the POSAS. In addition, the observer-reported VAS score and patient-reported Likert score were evaluated. Internal consistency, interobserver reliability, and correlations between the patient- and observer-reported outcomes were examined. RESULTS: The observer component of POSAS scores demonstrated higher internal consistency and interobserver reliability than the VSS. However, the correlations between the observer-reported VAS score and the patient-reported Likert score (0.450) and between the total sum of patient and observer component scores (0.551) were low to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The POSAS is more consistent over repeated measurements; accordingly, it may be considered a more objective and reliable scar assessment tool than the VSS. However, a clinician's perspective may not exactly match the patient's perception of the same scar.

Subjective Tools for Burn Scar Assessment: An Integrative Review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the clinical and scientific literature on the subjective ways of assessing burn scars and describe their main characteristics. DATA SOURCES: The Latin American, Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Nursing Database, PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus and Web of Science databases were used to search for studies published between 2014 and 2018 using descriptors in Portuguese, Spanish, and English. STUDY SELECTION: After establishing the research question and the location and definition of the studies, as well as accounting for differences among databases and application of filters based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, 886 references remained. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators reviewed the titles and abstracts of the sample and selected 188 relevant studies for full review. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-six subjective forms of assessment were found; most research concerned the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and the Vancouver Scar Scale. CONCLUSIONS: The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and the Vancouver Scar Scale are the most common scales for assessing burn scars and have similar evaluation points such as vascularization, pliability, pigmentation, and height, which are the main parameters that contribute to the general assessment and severity of a scar. There is a need to improve instructions for application of the scales to facilitate better understanding and improve agreement among evaluators.

Clinimetric properties of a translated and culturally adapted Norwegian version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale for use in clinical practice and research.

PURPOSE: To translate and culturally adapt the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale, POSAS, to Norwegian and explore its test-retest, intra- and inter-tester reliability. METHODS: POSAS was translated into Norwegian following international guidelines in collaboration with an international translation bureau. Twenty-six adults and 24 children were recruited from a burns outpatient clinic. Three observer-categories: doctor, nurse and physiotherapist, assessed the patients' scars and scored the Observer scale for estimating inter-tester reliability. Photos of the scars were taken and used to score the Observer scale a second time for examining intra-tester reliability. The patients or parents/next of kin rated their scar on the Patient scale at the clinic and after two days at home for examining test-retest reliability. Intraclass correlation (ICC) and Kappa were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A Norwegian version of POSAS (POSAS-NV) was developed. Inter-tester ICC of the Observer parameters varied between 0.203 and 0.728, and for the total sum score, ICC=0.528 (0.280-0.708). Intra-tester ICC of the Observer scale ranged between 0.575 and 0.858. The Patient scale demonstrated high test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: Intra-tester reliability of the Observer scale and test-retest reliability of the Patient scale of POSAS-NV were found satisfactory, but not inter-tester reliability of the Observer scale.

The Natural Evolution of Facial Surgical Scars: A Retrospective Study of Physician-Assessed Scars Using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale Over Two Time Points.

Background: The natural evolution of facial scars has not been well described. Identifying factors that correlate with optimal scar healing may help patients and physicians during the perioperative period. Methods: A retrospective study of 108 facial skin cancer patient scars was performed. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was used to grade scars at two time points (1 week and 3 months postoperatively). Paired two-tailed t-tests identified differences in scar ratings between the time points. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) explored whether POSAS scores differed by anatomic site or reconstruction type. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to identify if 1-week scar appearance correlated with scar appearance at 3 months. Results: Between 1 week and 3 months the total POSAS score improved by 36.3% and overall opinion of the scar improved by 38.6% (p < 0.001). Facial cosmetic units differed in their 1-week and 3-month scores and all anatomic sites demonstrated significant improvement between time points. Differential scoring occurred among reconstruction types. Scar appearance at 1 week was able to predict overall scar appearance at the 3-month visit (area under the curve = 0.7732). Conclusions: Early scar appearance predicts later scar appearance, and scars will improve by nearly 40% 3 months after surgery. These data can be used to assist with perioperative counseling and expectation management.

Reliability testing of the Matching Assessment using Photographs of Scars App.

The Matching Assessment using Photographs with Scars assessment tool, published in 2005, enables accurate relocation and reassessment of scars. While used in Australia, uptake has been hampered by its paper manual format. With electronic records and increasing use of smart devices in health, here we report the development of the Matching Assessment using Photographs with Scars manual into a mobile application format: ClinMAPSTM Pro. At the time of development, no other digital scar assessment applications were available. For clinical validation, the digitized Matching Assessment using Photographs with Scars module within ClinMAPSTM Pro was used for intra- and inter-rater reliability testing. Convenience sampling was utilized to recruit burns patients representing 44 scars, based on predetermined power calculations. Three therapists, one experienced and two novice, acted as the assessors. Each therapist assessed preselected scars with the digitized Matching Assessment using Photographs with Scars. Re-assessment of the same scar sites occurred 3 to 7 days later. Inter-rater reliability testing scores of the new electronic assessment application showed fair to moderate agreement (combined Fleiss Kappa = 0.38-0.49, P < .0001). Intra-rater reliability scores between initial and repeat measures showed moderate to almost perfect agreement (Cohen's Kappa = 0.43-0.90, P < .0001). It was noted that for an experienced rater, intra-rater agreement demonstrated substantial to almost perfect agreement. Intraclass correlation coefficients calculated to allow for comparison between other published scar assessment tools demonstrated excellent reliability for all scar assessment parameters for both intra- (=0.76-0.91) and inter- (=0.76-0.98) reliability. Notably, reliability testing results confirm its intra- and inter-rater reliability. Our findings validate this novel concept for digitization of the previously paper-based scar assessment manual and prove that the Matching Assessment using Photographs with Scars within the ClinMAPSTM Pro application is now readily available for clinicians and researchers internationally.

Evaluating Current Scar Assessment Methods.

Current scar surveys have included many questions to evaluate the physical characteristics of scars, with some expanding to include physical implications and patient opinions. This review provides an analysis of frequently used scar assessment methods to date and highlights potential areas for improvement. We build the case that a new assessment tool is necessary, specifically one that centers on psychosocial consequences of scars that influence patient decision making for treatment, allowing physicians to individualize treatment conversations with patients. We postulate that survey techniques used in consumer product marketing, such as choice-based conjoint analysis, may be effective in determining the factors strongly influencing patient decision making and spending in scar treatment; therefore, more research in this area is warranted. By incorporating these psychosocial and economic considerations driving scar treatment decisions, future scar assessment tools may accomplish much more than characterizing/documenting the clinical aspects of scars. Rather, these patient-centered, holistic tools may be implemented by plastic surgeons and other clinicians specifically to provide patients with personalized treatment options that maximize long-term patient satisfaction.

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire to the Spanish language in head and neck surgery.

External appearance is the main aesthetic outcome in patients who undergo surgical procedures. Scars located in exposed areas, such as the neck and face, are important for patients. There are at least eight instruments that are used to evaluate postoperative scars, but few fulfil standard methodological conditions. The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ) was designed and validated using psychometric methodology. However, this scale has not been translated or validated in the Spanish language. The aim of this study was to undergo a cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the PSAQ scale to the Spanish language in patients who underwent head and neck surgery. We followed The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) guidelines for the translation and validation of health-related scales. Forward and back translations were made by independent translators. We included adult patients who underwent thyroidectomy, parathyroidectomy, parotidectomy, and neck dissection. For the psychometric validation, we used a principal axis exploratory factor analysis with oblimin rotation. A reliability test involving Cronbachs alpha and the item-total correlation was performed and for the convergent/concurrent validity, we selected the Spanish version of the Vancouver Scar Scale. A total of 180 patients were recruited. Factor analysis showed a five-factor solution. Cronbachs alpha for the subscales was >0.7. The comparison between the PSAQ appearance subscale and the VSS demonstrated a high correlation (rho = - 0.89). In a sample of 62 patients, the test-retest evaluation showed high correlation (0.74-0.99). Our study supports the Spanish version of the PSAQ as a valid, reliable, and reproducible tool to assess the perception and impact of neck scars in Spanish-speaking patients who undergo head and neck surgery.

Adaptación transcultural del cuestionario POSAS (Patient and Observer Scar Assessment) para valoración de cicatrices / Transcultural adaptation of the POSAS questionnaire (Patient and Observer Scar Assessment) to assess scars

Resumen Introducción: La escala POSAS para evaluación de cicatrices está validada y muestra ventajas sobre otras escalas por integrar parámetros cualitativos y la opinión del paciente. Tiene un uso creciente en la práctica clínica, pero hace falta su adaptación transcultural para su aplicación local. Objetivo: Realizar una adaptación transcultural de la escala POSAS 2.0 original. Materiales y Método: Con técnica de traducción dinámica se efectuó traducción de POSAS en inglés, comparación de traducciones, traducción inversa y prueba piloto en observadores y pacientes. Resultados: Se obtuvo buena correlación de traducciones, los observadores y pacientes lograron comprender el instrumento adaptado en un estudio piloto. Conclusión: Obtuvimos una versión adaptada de la escala POSAS, aplicable a población local para valoración de diferentes tipos de cicatrices. Se puede someter la escala adaptada a procesos de validación.

Introduction: The POSAS scale for the evaluation of scars is validated and shows advantages over other scales by integrating qualitative parameters and the opinion of the patient. It has a growing use in clinical practice, but its transcultural adaptation is needed for its local application. Aim: To carry out a transcultural adaptation of the original POSAS 2.0 scale. Materials and Method: With dynamic translation technique, translation of POSAS in english, comparison of translations, inverse translation and pilot test in observers and patients. Results: Good correlation of translations was obtained, observers and patients were able to understand the instrument adapted in a pilot study. Conclusion: We obtained an adapted version of the POSAS scale, applicable to the local population for assessment of different types of scars. The adapted scale can be submitted to validation processes.

Cross-cultural adaptation, reproducibility and validation of the Italian version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS).

The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is one of the most robust instruments to assess scar quality, but there is no Italian version, and no other competing instruments are available in Italian. The aim of this study was to translate and validate an Italian version of POSAS (POSAS-I). POSASv2.0 was culturally adapted in accordance with international standards. The psychometric assessment included acceptability/feasibility, internal consistency, reproducibility, construct validity and sensitivity to change. Cultural equivalence of POSAS-I with the English version was confirmed. The validation study included 102 subjects with surgical scars. Both subscales demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0·72-0·80). Reproducibility of the OSAS-I (ICCs = 0·93-0·94; SEM = 1·8 points; MDC95 = 5·1 points) was superior to that of PSAS-I (ICC = 0·65; SEM = 5·7 points; MDC95 = 15·7 points). OSAS-I showed moderate to good correlations with the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), Global Rating of Change Scale (GRCS) and PSAS-I. Sensitivity to change was large for PSAS-I (effect size = 1·08; standardised response mean = 0·96) and moderate to large for OSAS-I (ES = 0·69; SRM = 0·92). This study confirmed that POSAS-I can be used to assess patients with surgical scars in the Italian population. OSAS-I is useful for clinical and research purposes, while PSAS-I should be better used to capture patients' own opinions and symptoms in clinical settings.

The challenge of objective scar colour assessment in a clinical setting: using digital photography.

OBJECTIVE: Scar assessment in the clinical setting is typically impeded by a lack of quantitative data and most systems rely on subjective rating scales which are user dependant and show considerable variability between raters. The growing use of digital photography in medicine suggests a more objective approach to scar evaluation. Our objective was to determine if cameras could be of practical use for measuring colour in a clinical setting. METHOD: The measurement of colour and reflectance spectra in photographs faces two difficulties: firstly the effects of variable illumination spectra, and secondly to recover accurate colour and spectral information from the sparse red, green and blue (RGB) camera signals. As a result the colour rendition is often inaccurate, and spectral information is lost. To deal with variable illumination and other factors that systematically affect all reflectance spectra ColourWorker (a method for image-based colour measurement implemented in software) calibrates the spectral responses of the camera's RGB sensors using a colour standard in the image. To make best use of the calibrated signals, it takes advantage of the fact that although a given RGB signal can be caused by an infinite number of spectra, most natural reflectance spectra vary smoothly and have predictable forms. This means given a set of examples of spectra produced by the materials of interest, it is possible to estimate the specific spectrum that produced a given RGB signal once corrected for the illumination. We describe a method for recovering spectral and chromatic information relating to surface reflectance from ordinary digital images and apply this to analyse photographs of surgical scars, taken as part of a clinical trial, in an attempt to better quantify clinical scar assessment. It should be noted the pre-existing trial protocol did not allow for a comprehensive evaluation of the accuracy of the method which would require the spectrophotometric measurement of skin regions corresponding to those in the photographs. RESULTS: Scar colour was estimated reliably, and with simple image analysis we were able to record the change in colour across the skin. Furthermore, we describe a simple automated assessment procedure that enables scar severity to be quantified and defined using a single scalar value easily. CONCLUSION: Such image-based colour measurement and assessment offers considerable advantages over other current methods, including spectrometers, which measure only a single point, or printed charts.

[Assessment of REC (Reduction in Earning Capacity) after Thermal Trauma as Part of the Appraisal Process for Statutory Accident Insurance in Germany (Part 2): The New REC Form Developed by Ottomann and Hartmann in 2010]. / Die Einstufung der MdE nach thermischem Trauma im Rahmen der Begutachtung der gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung (Teil II): Der neue MdE Bogen nach Ottomann und Hartmann 2010.

The calculation of REC forms the basis of expert opinions for the purposes of making accident insurance assessments after an occupational accident or an accident suffered en route while travelling to or from the workplace. The estimation of REC is based on a procedure quoted in the 1995 "Jahrbuch der Versicherungsmedizin" (Yearbook of Insurance Medicine) using a form developed by Henkel von Donnersmarck and Hoerbrand. The overall estimation of damages resulting from the accident comprises 3 main components, namely the functional impairment, the assessment of local findings and the resulting somatic and vegetative complaints. The criteria for all 3 components are nevertheless imprecise and open to a great deal of interpretation on the part of the evaluator, leading to a highly variable and subjective overall assessment of REC. The new REC form includes a modified factor-based categorisation of the scar quality and the localisation, so that assessment can now be carried out in a differentiated manner. Visible, stigmatising areas such as the neck are provided with their own Q values. The pigmental and textural alterations describing the scar quality are now more precisely defined. Considering the complexity of the somatic and vegetative alterations, more precise (objective) assessments can now be derived. The new REC form increases the validity and transparency of post-thermal trauma REC assessments for the purposes of making statutory accident insurance assessments.

[Scars, physiology, classification and assessment]. / Cicatrices, physiologie, classification et evaluation.

A skin scar is the sign of tissue repair following damage to the skin. Once formed, it follows a process of maturation which, after several months, results in a mature scar. This can be pathological with functional and/or aesthetic consequences. It is important to assess the scar as it matures in order to adapt the treatment to its evolution.

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.

Rasch analysis of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) in burn scars.

PURPOSE: The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is a questionnaire that was developed to assess scar quality. It consists of two separate six-item scales (Observer Scale and Patient Scale), both of which are scored on a 10-point rating scale. After many years of experience with this scale in burn scar assessment, it is appropriate to examine its psychometric properties using Rasch analysis. METHODS: Cross-sectional data collection from seven clinical trials resulted in a data set of 1,629 observer scores and 1,427 patient scores of burn scars. We examined the person-item map, item fit statistics, reliability, response category ordering, and dimensionality of the POSAS. RESULTS: The POSAS showed an adequate fit to the Rasch model, except for the item surface area. Person reliability of the Observer Scale and Patient Scale was 0.82 and 0.77, respectively. Dimensionality analysis revealed that the unexplained variance by the first contrast of both scales was 1.7 units. Spearman correlation between the Observer Scale Rasch measure and the overall opinion of the clinician was 0.75. CONCLUSION: The Rasch model demonstrated that the POSAS is a reliable and valid scale that measures the single-construct scar quality.

Objective scar assessment tools: a clinimetric appraisal.

BACKGROUND: Scars may lead to an array of cosmetic, psychological, and functional problems. Different scar features can be distinguished (i.e., color, thickness, relief, pliability, and surface area) that are clinically relevant and contribute to the quality and judgment of a scar. Today, objective evaluation of these scar features is indispensable for practicing evidence-based medicine (e.g., to evaluate the outcome of clinical trials). In this review, an overview and update are given on the most relevant noninvasive objective measurement tools for scar evaluation. METHODS: A PubMed literature search was performed. Articles evaluating the clinimetric properties of noninvasive scar assessment tools were included. The selected objective measurement tools were then critically reviewed with respect to the clinimetric properties of reliability, validity, and feasibility. RESULTS: In total, 75 articles were selected and 23 different noninvasive measurement methods were evaluated. CONCLUSION: Based on the scar features color, thickness, relief, pliability, and surface area, the best measurement tools that are currently available were recommended.

The modified Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale: a novel approach to defining pathologic and nonpathologic scarring.

BACKGROUND: Scarring is a highly prevalent and multifactorial process, yet no studies to date have attempted to distinguish pathologic from nonpathologic scarring. METHODS: This article defines and proposes methods of classifying pathologic scarring as it pertains to clinical presentation. RESULTS: The authors propose a new scar scale that incorporates pain and functional impairment. CONCLUSIONS: The modified Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale is the first of its kind to factor in the functional deficits pain and pruritus of scarring into measurements of associated morbidity. This scale has great potential in evaluating patient response to treatment and analyzing clinical outcomes.

Detailed assessment of cleft lip scar following straight line repair.

Minimizing upper lip skin scarring is one of the most important factors in cleft lip repair. Currently, Millard's procedure or one of its modifications is the most commonly used surgical repair procedure, yet several surgeons continue to prefer a more natural-looking straight scar. Some publications concerning the resultant scarring after Millard's procedure are available; on the other hand, those concerning that after straight line repair are limited. This study aimed to evaluate and analyse upper lip skin scarring following straight line repair in order to further refine our surgical procedure. Twenty-six patients with ages ranging from 4 years and 11 months to 6 years and 10 months (17 boys and nine girls) participated in this study. Each upper lip skin scar was divided into three portions and evaluated by three board-certified plastic surgeons who calculated the evaluation score. The score for each portion of the scar was analysed to determine the correlation of the score with the five following factors: type of cleft, age at operation, length of operation, skin texture regularity and skin brightness; the last two were determined using a facial-measurement instrument. Taking all the results into consideration together with practical experience, the quality of scars of the upper lip skin was thought to be correlated with the skin brightness and length of the operation, particularly in the case of the upper and middle third portions of the upper lip. In the lower third portion, the scar quality appeared to be more influenced by the age at operation. It is suggested that early surgical intervention may help minimize scarring because lip motion is weaker in younger babies than in older ones.

Scar assessment scales: a dermatologic overview.

BACKGROUND: This overview critically compares subjective assessment tools and available objective measurement tools with potential devices becoming available. Our goal is to lay out the benefits of each scar assessment scale in order to propose good management skills for scars along with strong metric skills. METHODS: Classifying a scar is important in daily clinical practice. Ultimately choosing which treatment modality best fits can become a challenge. Scar classification needs a more detailed and systematic approach. We researched all different factors contributing to scar formation to come up with a more detailed criteria. Such factors included pigmentation/vascularity, surface texture, surface area, thickness (scar height), and pliability. RESULTS: Few studies have assessed scars; each provided an assessment scale of their own. Each scale is compared on the basis of accuracy, reliability, convenience in terms of feasibility and price. CONCLUSIONS: There remains still no ideal objective measurement out there despite promise seen in subjective evaluation. Method refinement will however accelerate our knowledge and interventions - based on increasing study power with enhanced metrics.

Determination of inter-rater reliability in pediatric burn scar assessment using a modified version of the Vancouver Scar Scale.

The Vancouver Scar Scale is too subjective for our needs and is not culturally sensitive to our Aboriginal clients. The VSS was modified by developing a color scale to aid with vascularity rating. This study was designed to measure the inter-rater reliability of the modified Vancouver Scar Scale (MVSS). Three raters assessed 14 pediatric patients, resulting in a total of 32 scars. Data were analyzed using a Spearman Rank Order Correlation, intraclass correlation coefficient, and the kappa statistic. All subtests were shown to have significant (P < .05) correlations except for the pigmentation subtest. Because the pigmentation subtest has poor reliability, its inclusion in scar assessment should be questioned. Results indicate that only total scores of the MVSS should be used when determining burn scar outcomes because individual subtest scores appear to have little reliability. Further modifications to the MVSS followed by additional research with greater numbers of subjects are warranted.