Burns objective scar scale (BOSS): Validation of an objective measurement devices based burn scar scale panel.

AIMS: Hypertrophic scars in burn survivors are a major cause of morbidity but the development of evidence based treatments is hampered by the lack of objective measurements of these scars. The objective of our study is to investigate the most accurate parameters for objective scar assessment and to create a combination score to facilitate the use of a panel of objective scar measurement tools. METHODS: Three independent assessors evaluated fifty five scar sites on fifty five burn patients with both the subjective modified Vancouver Scar Scale (mVSS) and a panel of objective measurement tools including the DSM II Colormeter, Cutometer, Dermascan high frequency ultrasound. The sensitivity and specificity of the objective scar parameters in predicting a mVSS score of 6 or more using the Receiving Operator Characteristic Area under the curve (ROC AUC) was then calculated and the most accurate parameters were combined to create an objective global scar score. RESULTS: The ROC AUC values were found to be highest for the Dermascan scar thickness (0.897), dermal intensity and intensity ratio (0.914 and 0.919), Cutometer R0 value (0.942), and R0 ratio (0.944). For colour measurements, ratios of scar to normal skin performed better than the single parameters for both erythema and pigmentation measurements: DSM II Erythema ratio vs Erythema (0.885 vs 0.818), DSM II a* ratio vs a* (0.848 vs 0.741); DSM II Melanin ratio vs Melanin (0.854 vs 0.761), DSM II L* ratio vs L* (0.862 vs 0.767). Analysis of the ROC AUC with chi-square test values showed that the highest AUC (0.786) was obtained with the combination of the Cutometer R0, Dermascan scar thickness, intensity and their respective scar to normal skin ratios. A total score of 5 and above (out of 6 parameters) had the highest combined sensitivity (69.0%) and specificity (83.3%). CONCLUSION: The objective parameters for the DSM II Colormeter, Cutometer and Dermascan high frequency ultrasound were all found to have moderate to strong ROC AUC values and combination of the Cutometer R0 and Dermascan scar thickness and intensity values can be used to create an objective global scar scale that can accurately differentiate patients with hypertrophic burn scarring from non-hypertrophic scars or normal skin.

Investigating the intra- and inter-rater reliability of a panel of subjective and objective burn scar measurement tools.

BACKGROUND: Research into the treatment of hypertrophic burn scar is hampered by the variability and subjectivity of existing outcome measures. This study aims to measure the inter- and intra-rater reliability of a panel of subjective and objective burn scar measurement tools. METHODS: Three independent assessors evaluated 55 scar and normal skin sites using subjective (modified Vancouver Scar Scale [mVSS] & Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale [POSAS]) and objective tools. The intra-class correlation coefficient was utilised to measure reliability (acceptable when >0.70). Patient satisfaction with the different tools and scar parameter importance were assessed via questionnaires. RESULTS: The inter-rater reliabilities of the mVSS and POSAS were below the acceptable limit. For erythema and pigmentation, all of the Scanoskin and DSM II measures (except the b* value) had acceptable to excellent intra and inter-rater reliability. The Dermascan ultrasound (dermal thickness, intensity) had excellent intra- and inter-rater reliability (>0.90). The Cutometer R0 (firmness) had acceptable reliability but not R2 (gross elasticity). All objective measurement tools had good overall satisfaction scores. Patients rated scar related pain and itch as more important compared to appearance although this finding was not sustained when corrected for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSION: The objective scar measures demonstrated acceptable to excellent intra- and inter-rater reliability and performed better than the subjective scar scales.

The use of a non cultured autologous cell suspension to repair chronic ulcers.

The purpose of this uncontrolled study was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of ReCell(®) system in the treatment of chronic ulcers. From October 2011 to July 2012, 20 patients, 8 men and 12 women with a mean age of 70 years, with chronic ulcers of different aetiology that were unresponsive to conventional therapies were recruited and treated using the ReCell(®) system. Patient pain rate, scar aesthetics and patient satisfaction were assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale, Manchester Scar Scale and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, respectively. Complete ulcer healing, defined as 100% reepithelialisation was observed between 40 and 60 days in 14 patients (70%) depending on the type of ulcer and comorbidity. At day 60 postprocedure, 80% reepithelialisation was present in five patients (25%), while one patient with concomitant psoriasis had 50% reepithelialisation. Pain scores improved by day 7 postprocedure. The function and aesthetics of the ReCell-treated patients were good. It is concluded that the ReCell technique may have provided the regenerative tissue stimulation necessary for the rapid healing of chronic ulcers, including those not responsive to more traditional methods.