Efficacy of intense pulsed light for the treatment of burn scar dyschromias: a pilot study to assess patient satisfaction, safety, and willingness to pay.

INTRODUCTION: No treatment algorithms exist to reliably treat burn scar dyschromias. Intense pulsed light (IPL) has been used successfully to treat hyperpigmentation disorders, but has not been studied extensively in the treatment of burn scars. The purpose of this investigation was to assess clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction with IPL for the treatment of burn scar dyschromia. METHODS: Patients with burn scar dyschromias were treated using the Lume 1 platform (Lumenis) to target pigmented lesions, using fluences between 10 and 22 joules/cm and filters ranging from 560 to 650 nm. At the conclusion of the study, providers assessed changes in burn scar dyschromia, whereas patients were queried regarding satisfaction and perceived efficacy, using a 1 to 5 Likert scale. The patients, who were not charged for the IPL treatment, were queried regarding willingness to pay. RESULTS: Twenty patients (mean age, 35.4 years; mean total body surface area, 27.6%; mean composite Fitzpatrick score, 3.9) underwent IPL treatment of burn scar dyschromias, an average of 3.2 years after injury. Mean fluence was 15.4 J/cm (range, 10-22 J/cm), and the most common filter used was 590 nm (range, 560-650 nm). Mean area treated was 90.7 cm, with a range of 4 to 448 cm. Complications included pain (4), hyperpigmentation (1), and blistering (2). Sixteen patients noted mild to moderate improvement, reporting a 4.5 for efficacy and a 4.4 for satisfaction. Regarding willingness to pay, patients would spend a mean of U.S. $7429 to completely remove their scars, but only a median of U.S. $350 to get the actual results that they received. Mean length of follow-up was 3.8 months, with a standard deviation of 2.2 months. CONCLUSIONS: Patients perceived IPL as an efficacious modality in the treatment of burn scar dyschromia, with a high level of satisfaction, despite the potential for morbidity. However, we are reluctant to recommend IPL for routine treatment of burn scar dyschromias, given only minimal improvement observed, potential for complications, and a willingness to pay that is lower than the cost of providing care.

Patient perspectives on low level light therapy and laser therapies for rosacea-associated persistent facial redness.

INTRODUCTION: There are no definitive treatments of facial redness for rosacea. All treatments aim to alleviate symptoms. Patients' perspectives of two emerging modalities, Low level light therapy and laser treatments are not well characterized. The purpose is to further understand rosacea patients unmet needs about these modalities, Methods: The publicly accessible, online rosacea forum was accessed at august 2013. Stratified random sampling method has done to identify a 10% sample of total 27,051 posts. The Posts were published in the "Laser and IPL therapy" and "Low level light therapy" forums were qualitatively analyzed. RESULTS: Patients discussed a variety of topics, but most commonly discussed effectiveness (34.2%), treatment education (19.3%), and adverse effects (18%). Relationship with the health care provider (9.9%), cost (8.1%), execution of treatments (8.1%) and convenience of treatments (2.5%) were less commonly discussed, but contributed to patients' decisions about utilizing laser and light therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Online forums are utilized to fulfill patients' desire for educational, empathic and collaborative relationship. Patients' adherence to laser and light therapies will likely increase if costs are reduced, reduction in redness is consistent with their expectations, and if physicians empower them through education on device choices and managing adverse effects.