Comparison between the portable pressure measuring device and PicoPress® for garment pressure measurement on hypertrophic burn scar during compression therapy.

PURPOSE: The current standard treatment for hypertrophic scars following burn injury is pressure garment therapy. The experimenters developed the novel portable pressure measuring device using silicon piezoresistive sensors. As PicoPress® is the most accurate (i.e., lowest variation and error) manometric sensor for pressure measurement, we sought to compare and examine the accuracy of the novel device regarding in vitro pressure measurements at the hypertrophic scar-pressure garment interface. METHODS: The novel device was designed to operate in non-corrosive media, such as air. The device can use up to six pressure sensing points and was developed to adjust the number of pressure sensors according to the size of the scar. Pressure measurements were acquired through a readout circuit consisting of an analog-to-digital converter, a microprocessor, and a Bluetooth transmission module for wireless data transmission to an external device. All signals were converted into mean pressure expressed in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). The mean pressure values measured by the sensors were compared to those obtained from PicoPress®. 55 garment pressures recordings were obtained from the sensors over this study conducted in 2018-February 2020. We then analyzed the test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). PicoPress® was also employed in the same pressure garments for obtaining similar measurements. A two way random effects model ICC with 95% confidence intervals was used to compare the mean pressure values obtained from the silicon piezoresistive sensors to the PicoPress® measurements. RESULTS: The test-retest reliability of the pressure sensors was close to the acceptable level for clinical use regarding stationary interface pressure measurement (ICC = 0.99, 95% CI 0.990-0.997). The mean pressure obtained from the silicon piezoresistive pressure sensors showed an accordance with the measurements from PicoPress® (ICC = 0.97, 95% CI 0.947-0.985). CONCLUSION: The novel device may present a viable alternative to PicoPress® for garment pressure measurements. In addition, the novel device improves adaptability to the hypertrophic scar shape and size. Complementary characteristics such as wireless transmission to an external device may allow burn patients to continuously wear the device for real-time measurements during pressure garment therapy, thus improving existing devices including PicoPress®.

Effects of pain Scrambler therapy for management of burn scar pruritus: A pilot study.

PURPOSE: Pain Scrambler therapy is a patient-specific electrocutaneous nerve stimulation device. Burn pruritus is a common form of chronic and disabling neuropathic pain that is often difficult to treat effectively. Pruritus is mediated by histamines, which are effector molecules stored in mast cells and released locally during injury or inflammation. Burn pruritus may be accompanied by peripheral neuropathic pain, which may result from injury to sensory nerves that hampers conductance of neuronal messages along the large A and small C afferent fibers to the spinal cord. In this study, we investigated the effect of pain Scrambler therapy on burn scar pruritus. METHODS: Sixteen subjects were recruited to participate in this study. The subjects complained of severe pruritus that was rated at least 5 on the visual analogue scale (VAS), despite treatments with antihistamines, gabapentin medication, and other physical modalities. Each Scrambler Therapy with the MC-5A Pain Scrambler Therapy® technology device was performed for 40min daily (Monday through Friday) for 10 consecutive days. The stimulus was increased to the maximum intensity bearable by the individual patient without causing any additional pain or discomfort. The numerical rating scale (NRS), 5-D Itch Scale, and Leuven Itch Scale were administered and evaluated immediately before Scrambler therapy, and then immediately after 5 and 10 therapy sessions. RESULTS: For all 16 patients, NRS showed mean values of 6.75±1.13 before therapy, 5.06±1.53 after 5 sessions, and 4.13±1.45 after 10 sessions. The NRS values before therapy and after 10 sessions were significantly different (p<0.05). Pruritus frequency, severity, and consequences scores on the Leuven Itch Scale after Scrambler therapy were also significantly different (p<0.05). Duration, degree, direction, and disability scores on the 5-D Itch Scale were also significantly different (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Scrambler therapy is a non-invasive, non-medicinal modality that significantly reduced burn-associated pruritus. Scrambler therapy should be considered as a treatment option for burn survivors with severe pruritus.

Effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on scar pain in burn patients: A prospective, randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) has been used to reduce pain in patients with various musculoskeletal diseases and wounds. We investigated the effect of ESWT on scar pain after complete wound epithelialization in burn patients. METHODS: A prospective, single-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted from February 2014 to 2015. Forty patients with burn scar pain despite standard therapy (medication, physical therapy, and burn rehabilitation massage therapy) were randomized into ESWT or control (sham ESWT) groups. ESWT was administered at 100 impulses/cm (0.05-0.15 mJ/mm) once per week for 3 weeks. The treatment effects were assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS), pain threshold, Nirschl pain phase system, and Roles and Maudsley scores. RESULTS: The characteristics of patients between the 2 study groups were balanced (P >0.05) for age, sex, and total burn surface area (%). In both groups, the NRS, pain threshold (Ib/cm), and Nirschl pain phase system values significantly improved (P <0.05) after 3 sessions of ESWT or sham therapy, and there were significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of these 3 variables (P <0.001, P <0.001, P = 0.013, respectively). The Roles and Maudsley scores significantly improved; among 20 patients, 17 reported a score of poor (85%) and 3 reported fair (15%) before ESWT, whereas 3 reported poor (15%), 8 reported fair (40%), 5 reported good (25%), and 4 reported excellent (20%) after ESWT (P = 0.004). The scores did not improve in the control group (P = 0.128). CONCLUSION: ESWT significantly reduced scar pain in burn patients after wound recovery.

The effect of burn rehabilitation massage therapy on hypertrophic scar after burn: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of burn rehabilitation massage therapy on hypertrophic scar after burn. METHOD: One hundred and forty-six burn patients with hypertrophic scar(s) were randomly divided into an experimental group and a control group. All patients received standard rehabilitation therapy for hypertrophic scars and 76 patients (massage group) additionally received burn scar rehabilitation massage therapy. Both before and after the treatment, we determined the scores of visual analog scale (VAS) and itching scale and assessed the scar characteristics of thickness, melanin, erythema, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), sebum, and elasticity by using ultrasonography, Mexameter(®), Tewameter(®), Sebumeter(®), and Cutometer(®), respectively. RESULTS: The scores of both VAS and itching scale decreased significantly in both groups, indicating a significant intragroup difference. With regard to the scar characteristics, the massage group showed a significant decrease after treatment in scar thickness, melanin, erythema, TEWL and a significant intergroup difference. In terms of scar elasticity, a significant intergroup difference was noted in immediate distension and gross skin elasticity, while the massage group significant improvement in skin distensibility, immediate distension, immediate retraction, and delayed distension. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that burn rehabilitation massage therapy is effective in improving pain, pruritus, and scar characteristics in hypertrophic scars after burn.