Validation of the Burn Survivor Fear-Avoidance Questionnaire and Its Association With Pain Intensity, Catastrophizing, and Disability.

According to the Fear-avoidance (FA) model, FA beliefs can lead to disability due to avoidance of activities expected to result in pain or further injury. Extensive research on the relationship of FA, pain, catastrophizing, and disability has been generated with patients suffering from chronic neck and back pain, but little research has been conducted with burn survivors. To address this need, the Burn Survivor FA Questionnaire (BSFAQ) was developed (Langlois J, Vincent-Toskin, S, Duchesne, P et al. Fear-avoidance beliefs and behaviors of burn survivors: A mixed-methods approach. Burns 2021;47:175-89.) but has not been validated. Thus, the primary objective of this study was to investigate the construct validity of the BSFAQ among burn survivors. The secondary objective was to examine the relationship between FA and 1) pain intensity and 2) catastrophizing at baseline, 3 months and 6 months postburn, and 3) disability among burn survivors at 6 months postburn. A prospective mixed-methods approach was used to examine the construct validity by comparing the quantitative scores of the BSFAQ to independently performed qualitative interviews of burn survivors (n = 31) that explored their lived experiences, to determine if the BSFAQ discriminated those who had, from those who did not have FA beliefs. Data for the secondary objective, scores of burn survivors (n = 51) pain intensity (numeric rating scale), catastrophizing (pain catastrophizing scale), and disability (Burn Specific Health Scale-brief), were collected through a retrospective chart review. For the primary objective, Wilcoxon rank sum test results showed a statistically significant difference (P = .015) between the BSFAQ scores of participants who were identified from the qualitative interviews as fear avoidant compared to those who were identified as non fear avoidant, with a receiver operating characteristic curve indicating that the BSFAQ correctly predicted FA 82.4% of the time. For the secondary objective, Spearman correlation test results showed a moderate correlation between FA and 1) pain at baseline (r = .466, P = .002), 2) catastrophizing thoughts over time (r = .557, P = .000; r = .470, P = .00; r = .559, P = .002 respectively at each time point), and 3) disability at 6 months postburn (r = -.643, P = .000). These results support that the BSFAQ is able to discriminate which burn survivors are experiencing FA beliefs. It is also consistent with the FA model since burn survivors who express FA are more likely to report higher levels of pain early during their recovery that correlates with persistently elevated catastrophizing thoughts and ultimately results in higher self-reported disability. The BSFAQ demonstrates construct validity and is able to correctly predict fear-avoidant burn survivors; however, additional research is required to further examine the BSFAQ's clinimetric properties.

Fear avoidance beliefs and behaviors of burn survivors: A mixed methods approach.

The Fear-Avoidance Model was developed with patients who had sustained neck and back injuries and describes a cascade of events after pain that is perceived as threatening, which may lead to avoidance of valued and meaningful life activities. The literature examining burn survivors suggests they may experience fear-avoidance, however, their lived experience has yet to be thoroughly explored and the evaluation tool that has been used is four items extracted from the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia that were modified for burn survivors, but never formally validated with this population. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore, through a mixed methods approach, the lived experience of burn survivors with respect to fear-avoidance and determine whether the reduced four question Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (4TSK) reflects and accurately measures their experience. Burn survivors (n = 17) who had undergone surgical debridement and grafting were recruited. They completed the reduced 4TSK and participated in an in-depth interview to explore their lived experience regarding fear-avoidance and their opinions on the relevance of the questions. The interviews were analyzed using a thematic-analysis approach. Five major themes that represented the lived experience of fear-avoidance in burn survivors were identified: perceived vulnerability to re-injury, others as fear influencers, difficulties & hardships during recovery, engagement in activity, and active thoughts. Based upon the interviews researchers identified 9 potential fear-avoidant participants, which differed from the screening results from the reduced 4TSK (n = 12). Overall, this study demonstrated the potential uniqueness of the burn survivor population and provided insight into their lived experience of fear of movement or activities.

Randomized controlled trial of the immediate and long-term effect of massage on adult postburn scar.

BACKGROUND: One objective of massage therapy applied to hypertrophic scar (HSc), is to improve the structural properties so skin possesses the strength and elasticity required for normal mobility. However, research supporting this effect is lacking. The objective of this study was to characterize the changes in scar elasticity, erythema, melanin, and thickness immediately after a massage therapy session and after a 12-week course of treatment compared to intra-individual matched control scars. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, single-blinded, pragmatic, controlled, clinical trial evaluating the impact of a 12-week course of massage therapy. Seventy burn survivors consented to participate and 60 completed the study. Two homogeneous, intra-individual scars were randomized to usual care control or massage therapy plus usual care. Massage, occupational or physical therapists provided massage treatment 3x/week for 12 weeks. Scar site characteristics were evaluated weekly immediately before and after massage treatment including elasticity (Cutometer), erythema and melanin (Mexameter), and thickness (high-frequency ultrasound). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVAs) were performed to test for immediate and long-term treatment effects. A mixed-model approach was used to account for the intra-individual scars. RESULTS: Scar evaluation immediately before and after massage therapy at each time point revealed changes for all scar characteristics, but the group differences were predominantly present during the early weeks of treatment. The within group long-term analysis revealed a significant increase in elasticity, and a reduction in thickness, during the 12-week treatment period for both the control scar (CS) and massage scar (MS). The increase in elasticity reached significance at week 8 for the MS and week 10 for the CS and the reduction in thickness at week 5 for the CS and week 7 for the MS. There was no significant within group long-term differences for either erythema or melanin. There were group differences in erythema at week 8 and 11 where the CS was less erythematous than the MS. CONCLUSIONS: The immediate impact of forces applied during massage therapy may lead patients and therapists to believe that there are long-term changes in elasticity, erythema, and pigmentation, however, once baseline measures, the control scar, and time were incorporated in the analysis there was no evidence of long-term benefit. Massage therapy applied with the objective of increasing scar elasticity or reducing erythema or thickness over the long-term should be reconsidered.