Search

Advances in burn care continues to improve survival rates and patient outcomes. There are several burn prognostic tools used to predict mortality and outcomes; however, none include patient comorbidities. We used the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score as a surrogate measure for comorbidities, and evaluated its role in predicting mortality and outcomes in adult burn patients undergoing surgery. A retrospective analysis was performed on data collected from a single burn center in the United States, which was comprised of 183 patients. We evaluated the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score as an independent predictor of mortality and outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, mechanical ventilator (MV) days, and complications. We compared the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score to other prognostic models which included the revised Baux score, Belgian Outcome in Burn Injury, and the Abbreviated Burn Severity Index. Our results demonstrated that the revised Baux and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status scores could be used to determine the mortality risk in adult burn patients. The revised Baux was the best predictor of mortality, ICU LOS, and MV days, while the Abbreviated Burn Severity Index was the best predictor of total LOS.

Background Catheter associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) are the most common hospital acquired infections in the United States. External urinary collection devices (EUCDs) may serve as an alternative to indwelling urethral catheters (IUCs) and decrease the rate of CAUTIs. PureWick® is a novel female EUCD, with early case reports suggesting safe and efficacious use. However, no study has definitively proven benefit of PureWick® regarding reduction of CAUTIs. We sought to compare the CAUTI rate and median indwelling catheter days before and after availability of PureWick® at a single academic institution, as well as provide a descriptive analysis on female medical patients receiving an EUCD. Methods We performed a retrospective review of adult female patients admitted to our institution on a medical service who received an IUC and/or an EUCD. Patients admitted in the 3 months before (PRE) and 12 months after (POST) PureWick® availability were included. Two groups were compared: PRE patients who received an IUC vs. POST patients who received an IUC and/or EUCD. Results Out of 866 female patients, 296 received an EUCD in the POST cohort and overall, 673 received an IUC (261 (100%) PRE vs. 412 (68.1%) POST). There were no differences in the cohorts regarding age and comorbidities (all p >0.05). Compared to the PRE cohort, the POST cohort had a higher number of IUC days (median, 3 vs. 2 days, p< 0.001) and a higher rate of CAUTI (infections per 1,000 catheter days, 11.8 vs. 4.1, p=0.003) while overall UTI rate was similar (infections per 1,000 patient days, 19.1 vs. 14.12, p=0.410). In the POST cohort, the rate of UTI associated with EUCD use was 11.6 infections per 1,000 device days. Measurement of strict ins and outs (56.8%) was the most common indication for use of EUCD. Table 1. Characteristics and comorbidities of female catheterized patients admitted to a medical service before (PRE) and after (POST) PureWick implementation. Table 2. Urinary tract infection rates of female catheterized patients PRE and POST PureWick implementation. Table 3. Characteristics of hospitalized female patients admitted to a medical service who received a PureWick catheter. Conclusion While EUCDs might appear to be a promising alternative to IUCs for female patients, this single center pre/post analysis found that both the median number of IUC days and the CAUTI rate increased after introduction of a single EUCD. This may be related to selection bias, with EUCDs being ordered for patients who would not have otherwise received an IUC. Further research is needed to clarify if female EUCDs can be effective in decreasing IUC days and/or CAUTI rates prior to any widespread adoption. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Introduction The four main prognostic models used to determine risk of burn mortality are the revised Baux (rBaux), Belgian Outcome in Burn Injury (BOBI), Abbreviated Burn Severity Index (ABSI), and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA). These models fail to factor in medical comorbidities. The ASA PS (American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status) is a simple scale incorporating severity of traumatic injury with comorbidities, which strongly predicts mortality in surgical patients. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the ASA PS is an adequate adjunct to measure burn severity. Methods All adults admitted to an ABA verified burn center from January 2016 to April 2019 with TBSA ≥10% who underwent surgery were reviewed. Demographics (age, gender, TBSA, race, ASA PS), vital signs (GCS, blood pressure, respiratory rate), and outcome variables (length of stay [LOS], mechanical ventilation [MV] days, and complications) were evaluated. rBaux, BOBI, ABSI, and qSOFA scores were calculated. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. After descriptive statistical analysis, mortality associations of the models were assessed by determining odds ratios. Firth’s logistic regression and area under the receiver operator curves determined the predictive utility of the prognostic scores. Results Of the 183 patients who fit inclusion criteria, median age was 44 years (30–57), and the majority (70%) were male. Median TBSA was 20%, 65% (n=118) had full thickness burns, 14% (n=25) had inhalation injury, and mortality was 9% (n=17). rBaux score was the best predictor of mortality (AUC=.84), ICU LOS (R2=.04), and MV days (R2=.06). For every 10-point increase in rBaux score, there was a 1.7 times increase in mortality (OR=1.7, CI 1.4–2.3, p< .00). The predicted ICU LOS increases from 2.8 to 31.4 days for the lowest and highest rBaux score quartiles. Compared to rBaux scores of 30–53, patients with scores of 54–70 had 4 times more MV days (CI 1.5–11, p< .00). The ASA PS was slightly inferior to rBaux in predicting mortality (AUC=.72), although not statistically significant (p=0.1). As ASA PS score went from I/II to III, III to IV, and IV to V/VI; mortality increased by 2.8 (OR=2.8, CI 1.5–5.5, p< .00). Conclusions rBaux is the best predictor of mortality, ICU LOS, and MV days although ASA PS also predicts mortality. Future studies should determine the combined predictive ability of ASA PS and rBaux. Applicability of Research to Practice rBaux and ASA PS scores can be used to determine risk of mortality in burn patients.