RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Postburn pruritus (itch) is a common and distressing symptom experienced on healing or healed burn or donor site wounds. Topical, systemic, and physical treatments are available to control postburn pruritus; however, it remains unclear how effective these are. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for treating postburn pruritus in any care setting. SEARCH METHODS: In September 2022, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and scanned references of relevant publications to identify eligible trials. There were no restrictions with respect to language, publication date, or study setting. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled people with postburn pruritus to compare an intervention for postburn pruritus with any other intervention, placebo or sham intervention, or no intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 25 RCTs assessing 21 interventions with 1166 randomised participants. These 21 interventions can be grouped into six categories: neuromodulatory agents (such as doxepin, gabapentin, pregabalin, ondansetron), topical therapies (such as CQ-01 hydrogel, silicone gel, enalapril ointment, Provase moisturiser, beeswax and herbal oil cream), physical modalities (such as massage therapy, therapeutic touch, extracorporeal shock wave therapy, enhanced education about silicone gel sheeting), laser scar revision (pulsed dye laser, pulsed high-intensity laser, fractional CO2 laser), electrical stimulation (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation), and other therapies (cetirizine/cimetidine combination, lemon balm tea). Most RCTs were conducted at academic hospitals and were at a high risk of performance, attrition, and detection bias. While 24 out of 25 included studies reported change in burn-related pruritus, secondary outcomes such as cost-effectiveness, pain, patient perception, wound healing, and participant health-related quality of life were not reported or were reported incompletely. Neuromodulatory agents versus antihistamines or placebo There is low-certainty evidence that doxepin cream may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with oral antihistamine (mean difference (MD) -2.60 on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS), 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.79 to -1.42; 2 studies, 49 participants). A change of 2 points represents a minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Due to very low-certainty evidence, it is uncertain whether doxepin cream impacts the incidence of somnolence as an adverse event compared to oral antihistamine (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.25; 1 study, 24 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is low-certainty evidence that gabapentin may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with cetirizine (MD -2.40 VAS, 95% CI -4.14 to -0.66; 1 study, 40 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. There is low-certainty evidence that gabapentin reduces the incidence of somnolence compared to cetirizine (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.38; 1 study, 40 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is low-certainty evidence that pregabalin may result in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with cetirizine with pheniramine maleate (MD -0.80 VAS, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.36; 1 study, 40 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. There is low-certainty evidence that pregabalin reduces the incidence of somnolence compared to cetirizine (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.69; 1 study, 40 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ondansetron probably results in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with diphenhydramine (MD -0.76 on a 0 to 10 numeric analogue scale (NAS), 95% CI -1.50 to -0.02; 1 study, 38 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. No data were reported on pain and adverse events in the included study. Topical therapies versus relevant comparators There is moderate-certainty evidence that enalapril ointment probably decreases mean burn-related pruritus compared with placebo control (MD -0.70 on a 0 to 4 scoring table for itching, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.36; 1 study, 60 participants). No data were reported on pain and adverse events in the included study. Physical modalities versus relevant comparators Compared with standard care, there is low-certainty evidence that massage may reduce burn-related pruritus (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.86, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.27; 2 studies, 166 participants) and pain (SMD -1.32, 95% CI -1.66 to -0.98). These SMDs equate to a 4.60-point reduction in pruritus and a 3.74-point reduction in pain on a 10-point VAS. A change of 2 VAS points in itch represents a MCID. No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies. There is low-certainty evidence that extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with sham stimulation (SMD -1.20, 95% CI -1.65 to -0.75; 2 studies, 91 participants). This equates to a 5.93-point reduction in pruritus on a 22-point 12-item Pruritus Severity Scale. There is low-certainty evidence that ESWT may reduce pain compared with sham stimulation (MD 2.96 on a 0 to 25 pressure pain threshold (PPT), 95% CI 1.76 to 4.16; 1 study, 45 participants). No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies. Laser scar revision versus untreated or placebo controls There is moderate-certainty evidence that pulsed high-intensity laser probably results in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with placebo laser (MD -0.51 on a 0 to 1 Itch Severity Scale (ISS), 95% CI -0.64 to -0.38; 1 study, 49 participants). There is moderate-certainty evidence that pulsed high-intensity laser probably reduces pain compared with placebo laser (MD -3.23 VAS, 95% CI -5.41 to -1.05; 1 study, 49 participants). No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate to low-certainty evidence on the effects of 21 interventions. Most studies were small and at a high risk of bias related to blinding and incomplete outcome data. Where there is moderate-certainty evidence, practitioners should consider the applicability of the evidence for their patients.
Asunto(s)
Quemaduras , Prurito , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Prurito/etiología , Prurito/terapia , Quemaduras/complicaciones , Quemaduras/terapia , Sesgo , Antipruriginosos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Ethnic minorities experience disparities in prevention and treatment of burn injury. Research focused on burn injuries in Indigenous populations is limited. This review summarizes literature on burn injuries in Indigenous populations to be considered to inform new research. METHODS: A search was conducted in CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, PSYCinfo and SocINDEX. for "burn OR scars OR scald OR deformity OR disfigurement" and "Aboriginal OR Indigenous OR First Nation OR American Indian OR Maori OR Native OR Torres Strait Islander OR Amerindian OR Inuit OR Metis OR Pacific Islander". Inclusion 1) peer reviewed studies of burns in Indigenous persons 2) in English. Exclusion 1) no data specific to Indigenous burns 2) not peer reviewed 3) not in full text 4) protocol publications. RESULTS: The search identified 1091 studies with 51 for review. Sixteen were excluded. The 35 included publications were published between 1987 and 2022. Findings indicated higher incidence of injury and poorer outcomes amongst Indigenous people. Indigenous people suffered more flame and inhalation burns, had longer lengths of stay, and more complications including hypertrophic scarring. Australian Indigenous patients struggle with a lack of culturally safe communication and support for aftercare. CONCLUSION: Racial disparities exist in burn injury incidence and outcome for Indigenous persons. Qualitative research in this area will help providers better understand the experiences of Indigenous burn patients to develop more culturally competent care. We are currently developing a study using qualitative hermeneutic methodology to learn about the experiences of Indigenous burn survivors' injuries, recovery, and social reintegration.
Asunto(s)
Quemaduras , Humanos , Quemaduras/etnología , Quemaduras/epidemiología , Australia/epidemiología , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/etnología , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/epidemiología , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/etiología , Pueblos Indígenas , Nativos de Hawái y Otras Islas del Pacífico/estadística & datos numéricos , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnología , Incidencia , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Indígenas NorteamericanosRESUMEN
Burn mass casualty incident (BMCI) preparedness is lacking across Canada. A focused exploration of the current policies, protocols and practices in Alberta that address the response to a BMCI was conducted. In this case study, data were gathered from documents outlining the health system response to a mass casualty incident and health care professionals directly involved. Interviews were conducted online, recorded and transcribed. Qualitative description was used to code common themes across documents and transcripts. Fifteen documents and nine participant interviews were included in this study. Overall, the current policies, protocols and practices in place were limited to all-hazards mass casualty incident planning and did not address the specialized needs of burn patients. Deficiencies included no burn-specific plan at each of the two burn centres, a lack of provincial-level recognition of the unique challenges associated with a BMCI and no established Canadian burn disaster communication plan. Suggestions of strategies for a burn plan included forward triage, patient movement, use of telemedicine, partnering skilled and non-skilled staff, and procuring additional supplies. For best patient outcomes the provincial health authority needs to provide dedicated time for burn care experts to develop BMCI response plans to better address this unique hazard.