Search

Mucormycosis is an opportunistic fungal infection with a high mortality rate. Though typically associated with diabetes and other conditions that affect innate immune function, infections can also be precipitated by conditions such as trauma and burns. Burn patients are particularly susceptible to fungal infections due to the immune dysfunction that often accompany their wounds. Indeed case series have described mucormycosis to occur in patients with burn injuries, however the factors contributing to mortality have not been well described. Thus, the purpose of our review was to identify factors contributing to morbidity and mortality in burn patients with Mucormycosis.A systematic review of the literature of mucormycosis infection in burn injury patients was performed on Pubmed and Google Scholar using the keywords: Mucor, Mucorales, Mucormycosis, Mucormycotina, Zygomycosis and burn or thermal injury. Clinical trials, observational studies, case reports, and case reviews were included if they provided information regarding mortality in adult and pediatric burn patients diagnosed with mucormycosis, review articles, non-English articles, and articles without patient information were excluded. No time limit was placed on our review. Individual patient data was stratified based on mortality. Statistical analysis was performed to investigate the relationship between patient risk factors and mortality, and the Oxford Level of Evidence was used to evaluate study quality.46 articles were included in our final review, encompassing 114 patients. On average, survivors had a total body surface area (TBSA)% of 46 (SD 19.8) while non-survivors had a TBSA of 65% (SD 16.4), and this difference was significant (p .001). Patients with disseminated mucormycosis experienced an 80% mortality rate compared to 36% mortality rate in patients with localized disease (p .001). We found no statistically significant difference in mean age (p .05), diabetes (p .05), mean delay in diagnosis (p .05), time to antifungal therapy (p .05), or type of therapy used (p .05) between survivors and non-survivors. Our review was limited by the lack of prospective, controlled trials; thus, our review primarily consists of case reports.Disseminated infections and higher TBSA both increased the risk of mortality in burn patients with mucormycosis, while diabetes did not increase mortality risk. The severity of the initial injury and infection locations must be taken into consideration to inform patient prognosis.

There has been conflicting data on the relationship between burn severity and psychological outcomes. The present study aims to characterize the baseline psychosocial disposition of adults attending outpatient burn clinic at a large urban safety net hospital, as well as the impact of clinical course on self-reported psychosocial well-being. Adult patients attending outpatient burn clinic completed survey questions from the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Managing Chronic Conditions: Self-Efficacy for Managing Social Interactions (SEMSI-4) and Managing Emotions (SEME). Sociodemographic variables were collected from surveys and retrospective chart review. Clinical variables included total body surface area burned, initial hospital length of stay, surgical history, and days since injury. Poverty level was estimated by U.S. census data using patient’s home ZIP code. Scores on SEME-4 and SEMSI-4 were compared to the population mean by one-sample T-test, and independent variables evaluated for associations with managing emotions and social interactions by Tobit regression while adjusting for demographic variables. The 71 burn patients surveyed had lower scores in SEMSI-4 (mean = 48.0, P=.041) but not SEME-4 (mean = 50.9, P=.394) versus the general population. Marital status and neighborhood poverty level were associated with SEMSI-4, while length of stay and % total body surface area burned were associated with SEME-4. Patients who are single or from poorer neighborhoods may have difficulty interacting with their environment after burn injury and need extra social support. Prolonged hospitalization and increased severity of burn injury may have more impact on emotional regulation; these patients may benefit from psychotherapy during recovery.

Racial and ethnic minority patients experience worse hypertrophic scars after burn injury than White patients. Subsequently, minority patients encounter differences in scar-related recovery domains such as itch and fatigue. This study examines disparities regarding postburn injury itch and fatigue in minority patients to better inform counseling and treatment considerations. From the multicenter National Institute of Disability, Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research Burn Model System Database (2015-2019), outcomes were analyzed at three time-points (discharge from index hospitalization, 6- and 12-months post-injury) using the 5D Itch and PROMIS-29 Fatigue measures. Multilevel linear mixed effects regression modeling analyzed associations between race/ethnicities and outcomes over time. Of 893 total patients, minority patients reported higher/worse itch scores at all time points compared to White patients. Itch scores were significantly higher for Black patients at 6 months (β = 1.42, P = .03) and 12 months (β = 3.36, P < .001) when compared to White patients. Black patients reported higher fatigue scores than White patients at all time points. Fatigue scores were significantly higher for Hispanic/Latino patients at discharge (β = 6.17, P < .001), 6 months (β = 4.49, P < .001), and 12 months (β = 6.27, P < .001) than White patients. This study supports investigation of potential factors leading to increased itch and fatigue such as sociocultural factors, disparities in healthcare access, and psychosocial impacts of these symptoms. In the short-term, minority patients may benefit from additional counseling and focused treatments addressing itch and fatigue after burn injury.

Patients with psychiatric illness and substance use comorbidities have high rates of burn injuries and experience prolonged hospital admissions. This retrospective chart review characterizes this marginalized population’s inpatient burn care and examines post-discharge outcomes compared to burn patients without psychiatric or substance use comorbidities treated at our center. Patients admitted to a single burn center from January 1, 2018 to June 1, 2022 were included. Patient demographics, history of psychiatric disorders, treatment course, and post-discharge outcomes were collected. A total of 1660 patients were included in this study, of which 91 (6%) patients were diagnosed for psychiatric comorbidity and/or substance use comorbidity on admission for burn care. In this cohort of 91 patients with psychiatric and/or substance use comorbidities, the majority of patients were undomiciled (66%) and male (67%). In this cohort, 66 (72%) patients reported recent history or had positive urine toxicology results for illicit substances on admission. In this cohort, a total of 25 (28%) patients had psychiatric comorbidity at the time of burn injury or admission and 69 (76%) patients received inpatient psychiatric care, with 31 (46%) patients requiring psychiatric holds. After discharge, the readmission rate within 1 year of patients with psychiatric and/or substance use comorbidity was over four times greater than that of patients without psychiatric and/or substance use comorbidity. The most common causes of readmission were subsequent mental health crisis (40%) and inability to perform burn care (32%). Our study presents strategies to improve burn care for this marginalized and high-risk population.

Outcomes of burn survivors is a growing field of interest; however, there is little data comparing the outcomes of burn survivors by ethnicity. This study seeks to identify any inequities in burn outcomes by racial and ethnic groups. A retrospective chart review of an ABA Certified burn center at a large urban safety net hospital identified adult inpatient admissions from 2015 to 2019. A total of 1142 patients were categorized by primary ethnicity: 142 black or African American, 72 Asian, 479 Hispanic or Latino, 90 white, 215 other, and 144 patients whose race or ethnicity was unrecorded. Multivariable analyses evaluated the relationship between race and ethnicity and outcomes. Covariate confounders were controlled by adjustment of demographic, social, and prehospital clinical factors to isolate differences that might not be explained by other factors. After controlling for covariates, black patients had 29% longer hospital stays (P = .043). Hispanic patients were more likely to be discharged to home or to hospice care (P = .005). Hispanic ethnicity was associated with a 44% decrease in the odds of discharge to acute care, inpatient rehabilitation, or a ward outside the burn unit (P = .022). Black and Hispanic patients had a higher relative chance of having publicly assisted insurance, versus private insurance, than their white counterparts (P = .041, P = .011 respectively). The causes of these inequities are indeterminate. They may stem from socioeconomic status not entirely accounted for, ethnic differences in comorbidity related to stressors, or inequity in health care delivery.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, hospital systems delayed or halted elective surgeries and outpatient care, profoundly disrupting reconstructive burn treatment ranging from surgery to postoperative therapy. This study aims to characterize burn patients’ perspectives on reconstructive surgery during COVID-19. A 12-component questionnaire to burn patients awaiting reconstructive surgery at a single ABA-verified Burn Center was administered. Responses regarding willingness to undergo reconstruction, perceived medical and personal impacts of COVID-19, and perspectives on telehealth were gathered. Surveys were administered to patients/caregivers over the phone in English and Spanish. Inclusion criteria consisted of burn patients who had elective reconstructive surgeries delayed or canceled as a result of the pandemic. Fifty-one patients met our inclusion criteria. Of those, 23 patients responded to our survey (45%). Average patient age was 23, 43% were male, and a majority (52%) were pediatric. Twenty-two (96%) patients were willing to undergo reconstruction during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite a perceived increased risk. Forty-three percentage of patients disagreed or strongly disagreed that telehealth adequately enabled communication with their burn care provider. Seventy-eight percentage of patients agreed or strongly agreed that they felt more susceptible to COVID-19 as burn patients. Eighty-three percentage of patients agreed or strongly agreed that the COVID-19 pandemic had created stressors specifically related to their burn care. The majority of patients expressed a strong desire to return to surgical and therapeutic care delayed by COVID-19. Patients reported feeling especially vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic as burn patients and cited difficulty obtaining care and financial stressors as the main causes.

Burn wound depth assessments are an important component of determining patient prognosis and making appropriate management decisions. Clinical appraisal of the burn wound by an experienced burn surgeon is standard of care but has limitations. Infrared (IR) thermography is a technology in burn care that can provide a noninvasive, quantitative method of evaluating burn wound depth. IR thermography utilizes a specialized camera that can capture the IR emissivity of the skin, and the resulting images can be analyzed to determine burn depth and healing potential of a burn wound. Though IR thermography has great potential for burn wound assessment, its use for this has not been well documented. Thus, we have conducted a systematic review of the current use of IR thermography to assess burn depth and healing potential. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was performed on PubMed and Google Scholar between June 2020 and December 2020 using the following keywords: FLIR, FLIR ONE, thermography, forward looking infrared, thermal imaging + burn*, burn wound assessment, burn depth, burn wound depth, burn depth assessment, healing potential, burn healing potential. A meta-analysis was performed on the mean sensitivity and specificity of the ability of IR thermography for predicting healing potential. Inclusion criteria were articles investigating the use of IR thermography for burn wound assessments in adults and pediatric patients. Reviews and non-English articles were excluded. A total of 19 articles were included in the final review. Statistically significant correlations were found between IR thermography and laser Doppler imaging (LDI) in 4/4 clinical studies. A case report of a single patient found that IR thermography was more accurate than LDI for assessing burn depth. Five articles investigated the ability of IR thermography to predict healing time, with four reporting statistically significant results. Temperature differences between burnt and unburnt skin were found in 2/2 articles. IR thermography was compared to clinical assessment in five articles, with varying results regarding accuracy of clinical assessment compared to thermography. Mean sensitivity and specificity of the ability of IR thermography to determine healing potential

Burn injury can cause abnormal healing and pathologic scar formation that significantly impairs patients' ability to return to baseline levels of functioning. Quality of life can be significantly diminished due to pain, stiffness, contracture, and the psychological burden of disfigurement. Traditional scar therapies such as silicone sheeting and compression garments are highly reliant on patient compliance, and have not demonstrated satisfactory efficacy. Even more invasive therapies such as intralesional medication delivery or surgical contracture release have high recurrence rates. Recently, fractional CO2 laser therapy has emerged as a promising treatment modality for burn scars, but there is a lack of recent studies that aggregates extant data to demonstrate outcomes after laser therapy. To address this, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of fractional CO2 lasers in treating burn scars, and found that laser therapy alone yielded statistically significant improvements in scar profiles. There were very few reports of adverse effects, most treatments were provided as outpatient, and both patient and burn practitioners reported high satisfaction. By sharing our findings, we hope that more burn practitioners will consider adopting laser therapy as a safe and cost-effective first-line therapy for burn scar management.

Disparities in psychosocial outcomes after burn injury exist in patients from racial or ethnic minority groups in the United States. Peer support groups can help patients with many psychosocial aspects of recovery from burns; however, access to such support among patients of racial and ethnic minority or low socioeconomic groups are unknown. The present study examined participation rates in outpatient peer support within this patient population. Patients attending outpatient clinic at an urban safety-net hospital and regional burn center with a majority minority patient population were asked about participation in burn survivor group, interest in joining a group, and given validated survey questions about managing emotions and social interactions since injury. Current or past participation in peer support was low (4.2%), and 30.3% of patients not already in support group were interested in joining. Interest in future participation in peer support was highest among Hispanic patients (37.0%) and lowest among Black patients (0%). Logistic regression models demonstrated that increased total body surface area burned, hospital length of stay, and need for surgical intervention were associated with interest in joining or having joined a peer support group. Effectiveness of management of emotions and social interactions were not associated with interest in joining peer support in the future. These findings demonstrate a considerable difference between levels of interest and participation in peer support within this population. Improving access to and education about benefits of peer support in underresourced communities may help to address the variation in psychosocial outcomes of patients across racial or ethnic minority groups recovering from burns.

Hospitalized burn patients meet the criteria for Virchow’s triad (endothelial damage, hypercoagulability, and stasis), predisposing them to venous thromboembolism (VTE). Although the disease burden of VTE suggests a need for prevention in this population, unreliable reported VTE rates, costly and complicated prophylaxis regimens, and chemoprophylaxis risks have prevented the establishment of a universal protocol. This paper reviews thromboprophylaxis practices both in the literature and at our own institution. A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines identifying studies pertaining to VTE chemoprophylaxis in burn patients. Additionally, medical records of patients admitted to an American Burn Association-verified burn center between June 2015 and June 2019 were retrospectively reviewed for demographics, chemoprophylaxis, and presence of VTE defined as either deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE). Thirty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. In the 12 studies that reported VTE incidence, rates ranged widely from 0.25% to 47.1%. The two largest retrospective studies (n = 33,637 and 36,638) reported a VTE incidence of 0.61% and 0.8% in populations with unknown or inconsistently recorded chemoprophylaxis. Throughout the literature, prevention protocols were mixed, though a trend toward using dose-adjusted subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin based on serum anti-factor Xa level was noted. At our burn center, 1,068 patients met study criteria. At-risk patients received a simple chemoprophylaxis regimen of 5000U of subcutaneous unfractionated heparin every 8 hours. No routine monitoring tests were performed to limit cost. Nine cases of DVT and two cases of PE were identified with an incidence of 0.84% and 0.19%, respectively, and a total VTE incidence of 1.03%. Only one patient developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). No cases of other heparin-associated complications were observed. VTE incidence rates reported in the literature are wide-ranging and poorly capture the effect of any one chemoprophylaxis regimen in the burn population. Our center uses a single, safe, and cost-effective protocol effecting a low VTE rate comparable to that of large national retrospective studies.

INTRODUCTION There is an ongoing shortage of burn specialists, and workforce reports suggest possible hurdles attracting plastic surgeons into burn care. The purpose of this study was to (1) determine the state of burn care in plastic surgery residency and (2) identify what barriers might exist for plastic surgeons pursuing a practice that involves burn care. METHODS Surveys were distributed to North American plastic surgery program directors and residents, respectively, during the 2018-2019 academic year. RESULTS Fifty-eight program directors (response, 54%) and 320 plastic surgery residents (response, 30%) participated. Burn care was felt to be an important component in training by most program directors (USA, 88%; Canada, 100%) and residents (USA, 87%; Canada, 99%). The majority of program directors included a burn unit rotation (USA, 88%; Canada, 90%). Rotations for integrated residents averaged 2.5 months and most commonly occurred during second year; independent residents spent 1.2 months on rotation, usually in first year. Three-quarters of American residents were interested in a career that involves burn care in some capacity, primarily burn reconstruction (40%). Factors that would discourage a trainee from practicing burn care in the future included the nature of burn care (60%) and burn operations (45%), the on-call commitment (39%), and a narrow scope of practice (38%). DISCUSSION This study challenges the belief that plastic surgery trainees are disinterested in burn care. Burn surgery remains an important component of training programs, and we propose several steps to encourage greater interest and participation in the burn surgery workforce.

Stimulant (cocaine, methamphetamine, and amphetamine) abuse compromises the peripheral vasculature through endothelial injury. In combination with the physiologic derangements seen in burn injuries, patients abusing stimulants may have additional impairments in wound healing. A retrospective review from July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2018 was performed at an American Burn Association-verified burn center. Patients with positive urine toxicology results for stimulants (ST(+)), and those without (ST(−)), who sustained burn injuries were identified and matched by age and TBSA. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcomes included total length of stay (LOS), and need-for-surgery (grafting). In total, 130 patients ST(+) and 133 ST(−) patients were identified. There were no significant differences in age (40.9 ± 13.5 vs 39.2 ± 23.7 years, P = 0.46), Inhalation Injury (12.3 vs 9.0%, P = 0.39), or nutritional status (prealbumin: 17.3 ± 6.1 vs 17.1 ± 12.7 mg/dl, P = 0.66; albumin: 3.5 ± 0.6 vs 3.6 ± 0.7 g/dl, P = 0.45). There were no differences in mortality (6.1 vs 4.5%, P = 0.55), intensive care unit LOS (9.3 ± 16.5 vs 10.2 ± 20.9 days, P = 0.81), wound infections (15.4 vs 23.9%, P = 0.07), or wound conversion (6.9 vs 3.0%, P = 0.14). ST(+) patients had a significantly longer LOS (15.0 ± 16.9 vs 10.7 ± 17.3 days, P = 0.04), greater tobacco use (56.9 vs 18.0%, P = 0.00001), and greater need for grafting (54.6 vs 33.1%, P = 0.0004). ST(+) patients require more hospital resources—surgical operations and hospital days—than ST(−) patients. The increased need for surgical intervention may partially explain the increase in hospital days, in addition to the observation that ST(+) patients had more complex disposition issues than ST(−) patients.

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.

Introduction Patients who sustain burn injuries are frequently transferred to regional burn centers. Severely injured patients, unlikely to survive, may be transported far from home and family to die shortly after arrival. An examination of early deaths, those that happen within a week of transfer, may offer an opportunity to revise the way we think about critical burns and consider the best way to provide regional care. Methods This is a focused review of burn patients who survived ≤1 week after transfer to a regional center from 2013–2017. Originating location data such as city, state, population at origin were obtained. Transfer data, including mode of transport and distance traveled, as well as patient characteristics, Total Body Surface Area (TBSA) burned, inhalation injury, medical history with calculation of revised-Baux (r-Baux) score were analyzed. Results 25 patients (1.2%) met inclusion criteria. Patients were transferred from a wide geographic area with population ranges of 1000 to 279,000. 21 patients met criteria for burn resuscitation by TBSA; 4 (19%) were placed on comfort care upon arrival, 7 (33%) were placed on comfort care after discussion with the patient's family, and 10 (48%) received full resuscitation efforts. Of these 10 patients, 2 died as “full code”, 8 were transitioned to comfort care after failed resuscitation or other events. Code status was not always addressed prior to the decision to transfer. Two patients were transferred after cardiac arrest in the field both of which had significant medical comorbidities in addition to their burn. Conclusions Regional burn centers support a variety of populations. Transferring patients for which care is futile may have a profound impact on resource utilization from a variety of perspectives including transferring centers, receiving centers, regional Emergency Medical Services and families. Referring providers need to be supported in identifying these severely injured, potentially expectant patients. Transfer of patients may negatively impact families as a loved one may die far from home, before family can arrive. With our increasing ability to utilize telemedicine, transfer may not always provide the best support we can offer for providers, patients, and families. Applicability of research to practice Early deaths after transfer to a regional burn center, especially those that do not undergo a full resuscitation, should be critically examined to determine the appropriateness of transfer in a palliative, patient and family centered approach.

Burn wounds are most commonly evaluated through visual inspection to determine surgical candidacy, taking into account burn depth and individualized patient factors. This process, though cost effective, is subjective and varies by provider experience. Deep learning models can assist in burn wound surgical candidacy with predictions based on the wound and patient characteristics. To this end, we present a multimodal deep learning approach and a complementary mobile application – DL4Burn – for predicting burn surgical candidacy, to emulate the multi-factored approach used by clinicians. Specifically, we propose a ResNet50-based multimodal model and validate it using retrospectively obtained patient burn images, demographic, and injury data.

Pain following burn injury is associated with long-term health consequences in the pediatric population. Literature suggests nonpharmacologic treatment may provide improved pain control as an effective adjunct for these patients. This study aims to summarize randomized controlled trials on nonpharmacologic procedural pain management in pediatric burn patients. A systematic review was conducted on nonpharmacologic procedural pain management techniques used in the pediatric burn population. Fifteen studies were included and involved virtual reality, distraction devices, child life therapy, directed play, digital tablet games, cartoons, hypnosis, and music therapy. Treatment was effective in 8 out of 15 studies. Compared to controls, nonpharmacologic treatments reduced mid procedure pain by 19.7% and post-procedure pain by 20.1%. This study demonstrates that nonpharmacologic therapy can be an effective adjunct in pediatric procedural burn pain management, however further studies are needed to develop standardized algorithms to integrate nonpharmacologic treatments with pharmacologic therapies.

Racial and ethnic disparities are endemic to the United States and are only beginning to attract the attention of researchers. With an increasingly diverse population, focused and tailored medicine to provide more equitable care is needed. For surgical trauma populations, this topic is a small but expanding field and still rarely mentioned in burn medicine. Disparities in prevention, treatment, and recovery outcomes between different racial and ethnic minorities who are burned are rarely discussed. The purpose of this study is to determine the current status of identified disparities of care in the burn population literature and areas of future research. A systematic review was conducted of literature utilizing PubMed for articles published between 2000 and 2020. Searches were used to identify articles that crossed the burn term (burn patient OR burn recovery OR burn survivor OR burn care) and a race/ethnicity and insurance status-related term (race/ethnicity OR African-American OR Black OR Asian OR Hispanic OR Latino OR Native American OR Indigenous OR Mixed race OR 2 or more races OR socioeconomic status OR insurance status). Inclusion criteria were English studies in the United States that discussed disparities in burn injury outcomes or risk factors associated with race/ethnicity. One thousand one hundred and sixty-nine papers were populated, 55 were reviewed, and 36 articles met inclusion criteria. Most studies showed minorities had poorer inpatient and outpatient outcomes. While this is a concerning trend, there is a paucity of literature in this field and more research is needed to create culturally tailored medical care and address the needs of disadvantaged burn survivors.

The use of intermediate skin substitutes between debridement and final autografting is routine for many practitioners. Materials such as xenografts and allografts have been promoted to help with wound coverage before autografting. However, there is limited data for their use in relatively small burn wounds (50% graft failure), and time to complete healing (no further wound care required). Twelve patients (12%) had unpredictable graft beds, and their procedure was staged. These patients underwent surgical debridement and were dressed in antimicrobial dressing for an average of 5 days before autografting. No patients had intermediate skin substitutes between procedures. Eighty-eight patients (88%) were debrided and grafted in a single stage. In the staged group, there was a 0% rate of graft failure compared with 9.1% rate of graft failure in the primarily grafted group (P = .004). There was a similar length of stay and time to complete healing in the staged group and primarily grafted group (P = .496 and P = .571). There was a significantly shorter time from injury to first procedure between the staged group and the primarily grafted group (8.7 days and 13.5 days, P = .014). In the eight instances of graft failure, infection or inadequate debridement was the cause. Seven of these eight cases required further surgical intervention. Intermediate skin substitutes are an unnecessary step in grafting small burns. These add only complexity and cost to patient care. Many patients can be debrided and grafted in a single stage. Debridement alone with delayed grafting is a highly effective surgical method when the wound bed is not suitable for immediate grafting. The use of intermediate skin substitutes in small burns requires further investigation as this study finds low benefit for this product.

Introduction Severe burn injuries create systemic insults that are life threatening and require immediate stabilization, resuscitation, and, potentially, emergent surgery. Non-burn emergencies, such as stroke, have shown improved survival benefit and outcomes when patients are immediately transferred to specialized facilities. Our objective was to compare the outcomes between burn patients who were transferred to the burn unit from outside hospitals (HT) to controls who were directly admitted from our own emergency department (ED). We hypothesized that HT patients were at increased risk for mortality, wound healing complications, and infectious sequelae relative to the ED cohort. Methods A matched retrospective cohort study from July 1, 2015 to November 1, 2019 was performed at an ABA-verified burn center. HT patients were identified and matched with ED patients by age and percent total body surface area burned (TBSA). HT and ED cohorts were compared as a whole and then stratified into groups according to % TBSA burned (< 10%, 11-20%, 21-40%, and > 40%). Patient and burn characteristics were recorded. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcomes included total length of stay (LOS), ICU requirement and complications. Results A total of 410 HT and 377 ED patients were identified. There were no significant differences in age (P=0.17), burn severity (TBSA: P=0.27; full thickness burns: P=0.13), and inhalation injury (P=0.29). There were no demographic differences when comparing cohorts according to TBSA. For the primary outcome, there were no significant differences in mortality in the cohorts at large (P=0.48) nor between the groups when stratifying for TBSA (< 10% : P=0.35; 11-20% : P=0.44; 21-40% : P=0.30; >40% : P=0.26). For the secondary outcomes at large, there was no significant difference in LOS (P=0.35), ICU requirement (P=0.17), or wound and infectious complications (P=0.14). HT patients at large, however, spent less time in the ICU (P=0.03). Conclusions There was no significant difference in overall mortality rates between the HT and ED groups regardless of TBSA. Additionally, there was no difference in hospital course between the cohorts except for longer ICU stays in those admitted directly from the ED. Once the transfer process is initiated, our unit maintains close physician-to-physician communication with the transferring facility throughout the transfer process, including guiding initial resuscitation efforts. This may play a role in the parity of outcomes between groups.

Introduction Hypertrophic scars (HTS) and keloids (K) cause significant morbidity and disfigurement. Care of HTS and keloids range from less invasive treatments, such as pressure garments and silicone products, to more invasive treatments, such as intralesional injections (ISI) of medication, and surgical excision. Laser-Assisted Drug Delivery (LADD) is becoming a more popular treatment for HTS and K. The ablative fractional laser creates microchannels in the skins which allows the delivery of drugs into deeper skin layers. We have conducted a systematic review of the literature to assess the effectiveness of LADD in the treatment of HTS and K. Methods A search was performed on PubMed between January 1998-August 2021 using the following keywords: Laser Assisted Drug Delivery, Laser Combined Drug Delivery, Laser Drug Delivery, Laser Drug, Hypertrophic, Burn, Keloid, Scar. Inclusion criteria was the use of LADD in HTS or K. Exclusion criteria were studies in animal models, case reports, reviews, and non-english articles. One article was excluded due to concerns of plagiarism. Results A total of 11 articles were included in the final review. One study found no difference in HTS outcomes between LADD of corticosteroids (CTS) and laser with topical petrolatum used as a control. Two prospective studies found that LADD of CTS led to improved HTS outcomes. Two split-scar studies found no difference in K outcomes between LADD of CTS and ISI of CTS. One prospective study assessed LADD of CTS in K and found statistically significant improvements in scar outcomes. A retrospective study looking at K outcomes found a 50% mean improvement when treated with LADD of CTS. A split-scar study found statistically significant better HTS outcomes with LADD of 5-FU compared to topical 5-FU alone. One study found no difference in HTS outcomes between LADD of CTS and 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU). Two studies assessed both HTS and K. The first study found that both LADD of 5-FU and LADD of CTS led to significantly better scar outcomes when compared to laser monotherapy. The other reported that HTS outcomes were significantly better with LADD of Botulinum toxin A and K outcomes were better with ISI of Botulinum Toxin A. Conclusions The use of LADD is effective in the setting of HTS. There is evidence that LADD of scar modulating agents to HTS lesions is more effective than topical delivery or ISI of the same agent. LADD shows promise as an alternative treatment for K as it displays similar efficacy as ISI.

Introduction Outpatient peer support groups have been demonstrated to help patients reintegrate with the community and improve self-acceptance following burn injury. Despite this, there is little data examining who desires participation. This is especially true for minority and socio-disadvantaged populations. The purpose of this study is to examine factors that influence desire to participate in burn survivor groups and actual participation rates. Methods Patients attending outpatient clinic were asked about participation in burn survivor group, interest in joining a group, and administered National Institute of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Managing Emotions (ME) and Managing Social Interactions (MSI) questionnaires. Patient demographics, total body surface area burned (TBSA), initial hospital length of stay (LOS), and surgical intervention were collected from the medical record. While controlling for age and gender, indicators of injury severity and scores on PROMIS questionnaires were each examined for associations with survivor group interest using Firth or standard binary logistic regression. Results 70 patients completed surveys in English (60%, 42/70) and Spanish (40%, 28/70). Current or past participation in burn survivor group was low (n=3/70, 4.2%), with greater interest in joining burn survivor group (n=20/66, 30.3%). Most patients interested in burn survivor group were Spanish speaking (65%, 13/20). Interest in joining a burn survivor group was associated with all collected measures of injury severity (Table 1). Scores on ME and MSI were not significantly associated with burn survivor group interest (ME p=.636, MSI p=.133). Conclusions There is a gap between interest and participation in burn survivor group, particularly among Spanish speaking patients. Patients with increase in TBSA, LOS, and undergoing surgery were more likely to express interest in burn survivor group participation. Interestingly, patients’ self-reported outcomes on emotional distress and interactions with others were not related to interest in burn survivor group.

Introduction The most significant sequelae of foot burns in diabetic patients is a non-healing wound that results in a diabetic foot ulcer, which has been a predictor for need for amputation and mortality. Even minor amputations in patients with diabetes have a significant mortality rate. Our systemic review found that when 60% of a diabetic patient cohort with foot burns was managed by skin grafting, 29% subsequently required amputations, which is concerning. The practice at our regional burn center has been to manage patients with foot burns and diabetes non-operatively with daily dressing changes, and we believe that this may result in better functional outcomes, ambulatory status, and lower amputation rates. Methods A retrospective review of patients with diabetes and foot burns admitted to an ABA verified regional burn center was conducted. The primary outcome was amputation. Secondary outcomes were ambulatory status, wound closure, and infection. Rank sum and fisher exact tests were performed to compare patient demographics, comorbidities, uncontrolled DM (A1c >9%), and burn characteristics between patients who were treated surgically and those who received daily wound care only. These associations were subsequently evaluated with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). A multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate for possible differentiating factors that resulted in maintaining ambulatory status at completion of burn care. Statistical significance was defined as p< .05. Results Of 75 patients identified, median TBSA burned was 2% (IQR 2), and 61% (n=46) had full thickness burns. Mean A1c at admission was 9% (SD 2). In terms of management, 9% (n=7) were treated with debridement and/or skin grafting, and 9% (n=7) later required lower extremity amputations. Infection during first admission developed in 8% (n=6). At completion of burn care, 73% had normal or same ambulatory status, and older patients were less likely to maintain ambulatory status (p=.009, OR=0.92, 95% CI=0.86-0.98). Median time to wound closure was 95 (IQR 130) days, and 12% (n=9) of wounds never fully closed. Burn depth (second vs third degree), burn location (plantar burn vs other areas), uncontrolled DM, and surgical treatment did not result in a statistically significant difference in maintaining ambulatory status at completion of burn care. Conclusions Diabetic patients with foot burns are best managed non-operatively with daily dressing changes, and should be allowed to heal secondarily. This may result in a longer time to close the wounds, but the amputation rates were much lower when compared to surgical management. However, 5% of our cohort developed diabetic foot ulcers at completion of burn care, which is a complex disease process that carries a dire prognosis.

Introduction The significant burden of burn-related morbidity and mortality is partly due to the complex pathophysiological derangements that occur in the acute post-burn period. Critical care literature has pushed for tighter glycemic control, but these studies often use heterogenous groups of medical and surgical patients. Furthermore, some of these studies present conflicting evidence of whether there is true mortality benefit. Providers must balance the risks associated with hyperglycemia such as infection, inflammation, and pour wound healing against the risks associated with severe hypoglycemia, most notably coma and death. This study aims to review the literature on outcomes in tight glucose control regimens (glucose < 150mg/dL) in the burn ICU population to help guide further research and practice guidelines. Methods A systematic review of literature utilizing PubMed was conducted for any article published at any time. Searches used the AND function to identify articles with a burn term (burn injury OR burn care OR burn ICU OR burn OR thermal injury OR burned) and a glucose control related term (glucose control OR glycemic control OR glucose management OR insulin OR metformin OR glipizide). Inclusion criteria were English studies that describe intensive care unit (ICU) glucose management in adult burn patients. Exclusion criteria were involvement of children, animals, and settings outside of the ICU. Case reports, editorials, and position pieces were also excluded. Results The search identified 2,154 articles. Full text review of 61 articles identified 8 that met inclusion criteria. Two randomized control trials, 3 retrospective case-control studies, 2 retrospective cohort studies, and 1 systematic literature review. Only 1 study showed mortality benefit of tighter glucose control (< 150 mg/dL) compared to controls (< 200 mg/dL), while 3 studies showed no difference in mortality between cases and controls. Three studies demonstrated a reduction in infectious complications including sepsis, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and bacteremia. Nearly all studies (6/8) showed increased rates of hypoglycemia with tight control, but very few instances of adverse sequela following hypoglycemia were noted. Conclusions Like the broader critical care population, tighter glucose control may be beneficial to burn patients but with some variability. Balancing the complications of hypoglycemia with hyperglycemia continues to be a challenge with no clear guidelines. Further research in a burn specific population would help create a safe and effective treatment algorithm which could be adapted widely.

This case report describes a case of fatal toxic epidermal necrolysis complicated by both vanishing bile duct syndrome and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis due to Influenza B infection. Here we highlight the potential for complex morbidity secondary to underlying autoimmune hypersensitivity. Furthermore, the stepwise progression of these pathologies is noted, with the initial epidermal lesions first progressing to cholestatic injury and then subsequently to the hematologic manifestations.

Background Visual evaluation is the most common method of evaluating burn wounds. Its subjective nature can lead to inaccurate diagnoses and inappropriate burn center referrals. Machine learning may provide an objective solution. The objective of this study is to summarize the literature on ML in burn wound evaluation. Methods A systematic review of articles published between January 2000 and January 2021 was performed using PubMed and MEDLINE (OVID). Articles reporting on ML or automation to evaluate burn wounds were included. Keywords included burns, machine/deep learning, artificial intelligence, burn classification technology, and mobile applications. Data were extracted on study design, method of data acquisition, machine learning techniques, and machine learning accuracy. Results Thirty articles were included. Nine studies used machine learning and automation to estimate percent total body surface area (%TBSA) burned, 4 calculated fluid estimations, 19 estimated burn depth, 5 estimated need for surgery, and 2 evaluated scarring. Models calculating %TBSA burned demonstrated accuracies comparable to or better than paper methods. Burn depth classification models achieved accuracies of >83%. Conclusion Machine learning provides an objective adjunct that may improve diagnostic accuracy in evaluating burn wound severity. Existing models remain in the early stages with future studies needed to assess their clinical feasibility.

Hypoglycemic episodes are associated with worse hospital outcomes. All adult patients admitted to our burn center from 2015 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics and burn characteristics were recorded. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcomes were total length-of-stay and intensive care unit length-of-stay. All patients experiencing at least one hypoglycemic episode were compared to patients who did not experience hypoglycemia. There were 914 patients with acute burns admitted during the study period, 33 of which (4%) experienced hypoglycemic episodes. Of these, 17 patients (52%) experienced a single hypoglycemic episode, while the remainder experienced multiple hypoglycemic episodes. Patients with one or more hypoglycemic events were matched to non-hypoglycemic controls using propensity matching. Patients that experienced hypoglycemia had significantly less TBSA involvement (5% vs. 13%,median, p < 0.0002), higher prevalence of diabetes (48% vs. 18%, p < 0.0001), higher mortality (18% vs. 7%, p = 0.01), longer total length-of-stay (22 vs. 8 days, median, p < 0.0001), and longer ICU length-of-stay (12 vs. 0 days, median, p < 0.0001). A single hypoglycemic episode was associated with prolonged total (IRR = 1.91, p < 0.0001) and ICU length-of-stay (IRR = 3.86, p < 0.0001). Hypoglycemia was not associated with higher mortality in the survival analysis (p = 0.46).

Peer support group programs are often recommended for burn survivors as a way to facilitate their psychosocial recovery and reintegration into the community. Such programs provide opportunities for burn patients and their caretakers to access emotional and informational support from healthcare providers and other survivors in inpatient or outpatient settings. Despite their popularity, however, there is little information currently available on the efficacy of these groups. In response, we reviewed the existing literature on peer support group programs and their impacts on psychosocial outcomes for burn survivors and their caregivers. A systematic review of the literature utilizing PubMed, PsycINFO, and Medline databases was conducted for articles published between 1990 and 2018. Twenty-five articles including inpatient, outpatient, integrative peer support groups, and burn camps met our inclusion criteria. All inpatient peer support group program articles (n = 4) reported associations with psychosocial improvements. Integrative peer support group program articles (n = 2) reported associations with social integration and reduction in post-traumatic stress and anxiety. All outpatient peer support group program articles (n = 8) demonstrated associations with psychosocial outcomes involving life satisfaction, acceptance of self, and reduced levels of isolation. Findings were less consistent for burn camps: eight articles suggested improvements in psychological outcomes while three articles reported no significant psychosocial effects. Although these results are encouraging, further study is indicated both to replicate these findings, and to determine the optimal implementation of inpatient and outpatient peer support programs.

Postdischarge services, such as outpatient wound care, may affect long-term health outcomes and postrecovery quality-of-life. Access to these services may vary according to insurance status and ability to cover out-of-pocket expenses. Our objective was to compare discharge location between burn patients who were uninsured, publicly insured, and privately insured at the time of their burn unit admissions. A retrospective review from July 1, 2015 to November 1, 2019 was performed at an American Burn Association-verified burn center. All admitted burn patients 18 years and older were identified and categorized according to insurance payer type. The primary outcome was discharge location, and secondary outcomes included readmission and outpatient burn care attendance. In total, 284 uninsured, 565 publicly insured, and 293 privately insured patients were identified. There were no significant differences in TBSA (P = .3), inhalation injury (P = .3), intensive care unit days (P = .09), or need for skin grafting (P = .1) between the three groups. For primary outcome, uninsured patients were more likely to be discharged without ancillary services (P < .0001) compared to both publicly and privately insured. Publicly insured patients were more likely to receive skilled nursing care (P = .0007). Privately insured patients were more likely to receive homecare (P = .0005) or transfer for ongoing inpatient care (P < .0001). There was no difference in burn unit readmission rates (P = .5). The uninsured were more likely to follow up with outpatient burn clinic after discharge (P = .004). Uninsured patients were less likely to receive postdischarge resources. Uninsured patients received fewer postdischarge wound care resources which could result in suboptimal long-term results, and diminished return to preinjury functional status. Given the impact of insurance status on discharge location and resources, efforts to increase access for uninsured patients to postdischarge resources will ensure greater healthcare equity and improve quality of comprehensive care regardless of insurance status.

For critically ill burn patients without a next of kin, the medical team is tasked with becoming the surrogate decision maker. This poses ethical and legal challenges for burn providers. Despite this frequent problem, there has been no investigation of how the presence of a next of kin affects treatment in burn patients. To evaluate this relationship, a retrospective chart review was performed on a cohort of patients who died during the acute phase of their burn care. Variables collected included age, gender, length of stay, total body surface area, course of treatment, and presence of a next of kin. In total, 67 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 14 (21%) did not have a next of kin involved in medical decisions. Patients without a next of kin were significantly younger (P = .02), more likely to be homeless (P < .01), had higher total body surface area burns (P = .008), had shorter length of stay (P < .001), and were five times less likely to receive comfort care (P = .01). Differences in gender and ethnicity were not statistically significant. We report that patients without a next of kin present to participate in medical decisions are transitioned to comfort care less often despite having a higher burden of injury. This disparity in standard of care demonstrates a need for a cultural shift in burn care to prevent the suffering of these marginalized patients. Burn providers should be empowered to reduce suffering when no decision maker is present.

American Burn Association (ABA) guidelines recommend that all pediatric burns be transferred to a burn center if their presenting hospital lacks the necessary personnel or equipment for their care. Our institution often treats small burns (

Burn injury can cause abnormal healing and pathologic scar formation that significantly impairs patients' ability to return to baseline levels of functioning. Quality of life can be significantly diminished due to pain, stiffness, contracture, and the psychological burden of disfigurement. Traditional scar therapies such as silicone sheeting and compression garments are highly reliant on patient compliance, and have not demonstrated satisfactory efficacy. Even more invasive therapies such as intralesional medication delivery or surgical contracture release have high recurrence rates. Recently, fractional CO

The United States is facing a growing homelessness crisis. We characterize the demographics and outcomes of homeless patients who sustain burn injury and compare them to a cohort of domiciled patients. A retrospective cohort study was performed at the Los Angeles County + University of Southern California Regional Burn Center for consecutive acute burn admissions in adults from June 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018. Patients were categorized as either domiciled or homeless at the time of their injury. Prevalence rates were estimated using data from the regional homeless count. From 881 admissions, 751 (85%) had stable housing and 130 (15%) were homeless. The rate of burn injury requiring hospitalization for homeless adults was estimated at 88 per 100,000 persons. Homeless patients had a significantly larger median burn size (7 vs 5%, P < .05) and a greater rate of flame burns (68 vs 42%, P < .001). For the homeless, rates of assault and self-inflicted injury were 4- (18 vs 4%, P < .001) and 2-fold higher (9 vs 4%, P < .001), respectively. Homeless patients had higher rates of mental illness (32 vs 12%, P < .001) and substance abuse (88 vs 22%, P < .001), and were less likely to follow-up as outpatients (54 vs 87%, P < .001). There was no difference in mortality. Homeless patients had a longer median length of stay (LOS; 11 vs 7 days, P < .001) without significant differences in LOS per percentage TBSA. Homeless individuals should be considered a high-risk population for burn injury. This distinction serves as a call to action for the development of burn prevention strategies.

Burn care requires multiple disciplines to collaborate to achieve best patient care. Because of this, rounds involve a very large burn team to assess patients' wounds and formulate plans. To decrease the amount of team members on rounds, our burn center implemented a new budding technology: telemedicine. We created "Zoom Rounds," a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant, secure videoconferencing system to relay patient wound evaluations to a remote conference room where team members can participate digitally. We sought to evaluate this new rounding process by querying the burn team, patients, and families regarding their experience.Surveys were developed for each group and were distributed over a 2-month period. Respondents were asked to rate the videoconferencing rounding experience and comment on the educational experience (staff/providers) and one's personal experience (patient/family). We analyzed both the quantitative data with the qualitative responses. Qualitative data analysis for content was used to independently code and analyze responses to the open-ended survey questions by two authors and verified by adjudication review.Thirty-three patients/families and 69 burn staff members completed the confidential survey (response rate of 90% and 83%, respectively). Coded responses identified several themes: inconsistent technology, improved visualization and communication regarding the wounds, better learning experience, and improved patient experience by decreased crowds in the room.There was strong support for the use of videoconferencing for patient wound rounds among providers, burn center staff, and patients/families. Telemedicine is a promising technology to improve inpatient burn rounds.

Introduction There has been conflicting data on the relationship between burn severity and psychological outcome. The present study aims to characterize the baseline psychosocial disposition of adults attending outpatient burn clinic at a large county hospital, as well as the impact of clinical course on self-reported psychosocial well-being. Methods Adult patients attending outpatient burn clinic completed survey questions from National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Managing Emotions (ME) and Managing Social Interactions (MSI). Sociodemographic variables collected from surveys and retrospective chart review included age, ethnicity, zip code, employment, and marital status. Clinical variables included total body surface area burned (TBSA), initial hospital length of stay (LOS), surgical history, and number of days since injury. US census data based on patient’s home zip code was used to estimate percent of community living below US poverty level. Scores on ME and MSI were compared to the population mean by one-sample T-test. TBSA, hospital LOS, surgery, and days since burn were separately evaluated for associations with ME and MSI scores by Tobit regression while adjusting for sociodemographic variables. Results 71 patients completed surveys. Compared to the general US population mean score of 50.0, had lower scores in MSI (mean=48.0, p=.041) but not significantly different ME scores (mean=50.9, p=.394). While controlling for age, ethnicity, marital status, employment status, and neighborhood poverty, increased LOS was associated with lower scores on both ME and MSI scores (Table 1); the associations of TBSA, surgical Conclusions Burn patients may experience difficulty in getting support after burn injury. This challenge may be increased in patients with more extensive debilitation after injury, as increased duration of hospitalization worsened self-efficacy for managing emotions and social interactions. Additionally, prolonged hospitalization may remove patients from their normal support systems.

Introduction Patients with diabetes are prone to foot injuries and burns. Managing burned feet in patients with diabetes can be difficult due to multiple concomitant patient comorbidities that delay wound healing. Burn surgeons tasked with treating these complex foot burns understand that these patients are at risk of developing significant complications, such as infections and non-healing diabetic foot ulcers, which may ultimately lead to amputation. Although there are many studies that examine the causes and outcomes of diabetic foot ulcers and their management, there is a lack of consensus on how to best manage lower extremity burns in patients with diabetes. Methods A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA criteria and identified 18 articles addressing the management of burned feet in patients with diabetes. Means and standard deviations of scale variables and frequencies derived from nominal and ordinal variables abstracted from the literature were compared between each group. A meta-analysis was attempted but existing data was not of sufficient quality for meaningful analysis, and data aggregation was done where applicable. Results The three-database search identified 726 articles, which yielded 18 full text articles that met inclusion criteria. mean age of patients was 54 years (SD 7), and 80% (n=203) were male. Most (90%, n=179) had type II diabetes, and 10% (n=20) had Type I diabetes. Mean duration of diabetic disease was 11 years (SD 4), and mean A1c at admission was 9% (SD 1). Peripheral neuropathy (64%, n=123) was the most common comorbidity. Median TBSA burned was 2% (IQR 2), and scald (56%, n=155) was the most common mechanism of injury. Full thickness burns (70%, n=102) were most common, followed by partial thickness (28%, n=41), and superficial thickness (2%, n=2). A majority (55%, n=88) had burn wound infection identified at admission. Patients had a median delay in presentation from time of injury to hospital admission of 4 days (IQR 4.5). Sixty percent of patients received surgical treatment via excision and grafting, had a median length-of-stay of 20.5 days despite a median total body surface area involvement of 2%, and experienced sequelae of impaired wound healing such as infections, graft loss, and need for further surgery. Ultimately, 23% of patients had significant wound healing issues that resulted in amputation. Conclusions Excision and grafting may not be the optimal approach for managing foot burns in patients with diabetes, many of whom are at high risk of amputation. Non-operative management of foot burns in patients with diabetes should be explored as a method to decrease amputations in patients with foot burns.

Introduction Outpatient follow-up is a critical component of burn recovery. Sociodemographic variables that prevent patients from pursuing follow-up can lead vulnerable groups to have a lower quality of life after burn injury. Social media provides a platform for improvement of patient outreach and support. The purpose of this study is to investigate accessibility and interest in social media interventions among socioeconomically disadvantaged and minority burn patients. Methods Patients receiving treatment at a burn clinic in a large public hospital were asked to complete a survey about social media usage, difficulty attending follow-up appointments, and interest in engaging with the hospital through social media. Patient demographics and clinical data were obtained via chart review. The relationship between clinical or demographic factors, and interest in social media engagement, was assessed via exact logistic regression. Results Data were collected from 65 eligible patients. Social media use among participants (76.9%) was similar to the proportion in the U.S. general population (72%). 61.5% of participants used Facebook, 40% used Instagram, and 4.6% used Twitter. 81% of participants had consistent internet access. 58.3% of respondents expected to encounter challenges when planning follow-up appointments. Challenges included difficulty with transportation (26.2%), trouble taking time off work (9.8%), and forgetting to schedule (9.8%). Participants were asked if they were interested in receiving post-discharge education, care team outreach, and follow-up reminders via social media. 36.5% of patients were very or moderately interested, 27% were slightly interested, and 36.5% were unsure or not at all interested. 20% of patients both expected follow-up challenges and were moderately or very interested in social media engagement. While controlling for social media use, the odds of having moderate or greater interest in the post-discharge engagement program were estimated to be 2.6 times higher for patients older than 39 (OR 3.64; 95% CI 1.03-14.24; P=.044). There was a pattern of lower interest in social media engagement with higher %TBSA, while controlling for age or social media use, though P values were higher than .05. Conclusions Over half of the burn patients surveyed expected to face challenges when planning follow-up appointments, a third of whom were moderately or very interested in social media engagement. Social media may be an alternative form of outreach with older patients in particular. Observed overlap between follow-up difficulty and outreach program interest may suggest such a program could ameliorate follow-up challenges.

Introduction Thorough documentation is an important component of delivering quality patient care. Documentation of common data elements (CDE), defined as a precise question with a specified set of responses used across multiple databases or studies, can also assist in improving data collection. Currently, burn care does not have an existing set of CDEs despite their potential to be a reproducible and reliable system for data collection which leads to improved burn care. Our institution performed a retrospective review of patient charts to identify the consistency of our burn care documentation and highlight deficits that could be remedied by the implementation of CDEs. Methods This was a single-center retrospective review of patient charts from 2014-2019. Thirty-three CDEs were investigated. Two hundred four patient charts were randomly selected for review. We presented extracted CDEs as frequencies and percentages. Information was obtained from the history and physical notes, progress notes, and discharge summaries. Results Our review yielded 204 patient records. The note/record of some data points could not be identified and were excluded from the qualitative calculation. Of the data points that included more than 200 records, 86% percent specified the date of injury, 88% recorded the admission date, 99% reported burn etiology, 94% included total body surface area (TBSA) burned, 94% included burn thickness, 99% specified anatomic injury location, 97% included information about wound care agents/dressings, and 24% recorded the patient’s pain scores. Thirty percent (49/164) reported the presence or absence of inhalation injury. Twenty-six percent (38/148) listed reported presence or absence of non-burn related injuries. Sixty-four percent (127/200) reported presence or absence of comorbid conditions. Other data points were found with varying frequencies (Table 1). Conclusions Consistent documentation of burn care remains challenging and many variables are collected inconsistently. Our results highlight the need for CDEs in burn care to standardize documentation.

Introduction Racial and ethnic disparities in outcomes for surgical trauma populations has been an expanding field in recent years. Despite this, disparities in prevention, treatment, and recovery outcomes for burn patients of racial and ethnic minority backgrounds have not been well-studied. Our study aims to review the literature regarding risk factors and burn outcomes among racial and ethnic minority populations to develop culturally-tailored burn care for minority burn patients. Methods A systematic review of literature utilizing PubMed was conducted for articles published between 2000–2020. Searches were used to identify articles that crossed the burn term (burn patient OR burn recovery OR burn survivor OR burn care) and a race/ethnicity and insurance status-related term (race/ethnicity OR African-American OR Asian OR Hispanic OR Latino OR Native American OR Mixed race OR 2 or more races OR socioeconomic status OR insurance status). Inclusion criteria were English studies in the U.S. that discussed disparities in burn injury outcomes or burn injury risk factors associated with race/ethnicity. Results 1,031 papers were populated, and 38 articles were reviewed. 26 met inclusion criteria (17 for adult patients, 9 for pediatric patients). All but 4 of the included papers were written in the last 10 years. 17 of the 26 articles describe differences in outcomes or risk factors for Black Americans, 8 discuss Latinx, 5 discuss Native Americans, 3 discuss Asian Americans, and 1 referred to “Non-White” minorities, collectively. Majority of studies showed that racial and ethnic minorities (vs. Whites) exhibited poorer burn injury outcomes such as higher mortality rates, greater scar complications, and longer duration for length of stay. Conclusions Few studies exist on outcomes for minority burn populations. Interestingly, most have been published in the last 10 years, which may indicate a trend in increased awareness. There is also a discrepancy in which minorities are included in each study with the least amount of data collected on Asian, Latinx, and Native American communities. More research with a larger base of minority populations will help further investigate this problem and develop better culturally-appropriate burn treatment.

Introduction Homelessness is a rising concern as insufficient housing and significant barriers to shelter has led to more individuals seeking shelter in tents. Within this demographic there has been an increased trend of burn injuries from tent fires in regions with large homeless populations. This represents a public health crisis given the long-term psychosocial and functional sequela of burn injuries and existing data that suggest worse outcomes in the homeless population. To our knowledge, homeless related tent fire burns have not previously been studied in the literature. The aim of this study is to describe the characteristics and outcomes of tent fire burn injuries in the homeless population. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving two verified regional burn centers with patients admitted for tent fire burns between January 1, 2019 to July 31, 2020. Patients were identified as either domiciled or homeless based on medical records at the time of injury. Variables recorded include demographics, injury characteristics, hospital course, and patient outcomes. Results A total of 45 patients were identified. The most common mechanisms of injury were by portable stove accident (29%), assault (27%), bonfire (22%), and tobacco or methamphetamine paraphernalia-related (16%). Median percent total body surface area (%TBSA) burned was 5.5 (IQR 5.5). Maximum depth of injury was second degree in 62% (n=28) of patients and third degree in 38% (n=17) of patients. Burns to the upper extremities were present in 84% of patients and burns to the lower extremities were present in 53% of patients. Median hospital LOS was 9.5 days (IQR=10) and median ICU LOS was 2 days (IQR=4.8), with inhalation injury present in 16% (n=7) of patients. Surgical intervention was required in 40% (n=18) of patients, which included debridement, skin grafting, and escharotomy. In-hospital mortality occurred in 5% (n=2) of patients. Conclusions Burn injuries from tent fires incur significant injury burden to an already vulnerable population, with risk factors that predispose them to poor burn outcomes. Injuries in our cohort were severe enough to require inpatient and ICU level of care. We saw a high proportion of injuries to the extremities, which pose functional and psychosocial challenges to the wellbeing of these patients. Further resources are needed to better prevent tent fires and care for this population.

Introduction Blast injuries present unique challenges to civilian and military healthcare providers because of the complex and often severe nature of injuries spanning numerous anatomical regions, tissue types, and organ systems. Due to these factors, we devised a novel wound-focused classification system for implementation during triage and management of blast injuries to optimize outcomes and applied this system to patients treated at an ABA-certified burn center over 5 years. Methods A retrospective analysis of patients treated by an ABA-certified burn center for blast-related injuries from September 1, 2014 to October 31, 2019 was performed. Demographics, mechanism and distribution of injuries, interventions, and outcomes were evaluated. Injuries were classified using a wound-focused classification comprised of four zones: 1) areas closest to blast epicenter that had total or near-total tissue loss from the blast; 2) adjacent areas with thermal and chemical burns; 3) distant sites with shrapnel-related wounds; 4) injuries arising from barotrauma. Results We identified 64 patients who were mostly male (84%), averaging 38 ± 14 years old. Injury mechanisms included fireworks (19%), industrial accidents (16%), volatile fuels and drug labs (45%), and others including can, battery, lighter explosions (20%). All mechanisms had equivalent frequency of Zone 2 injuries with an average TBSA of 17 ± 18%. Drug-related blasts caused the highest TBSA (34 ± 23%) and the most full-thickness burns (33% vs average 23%). Fireworks had over five times (17% vs. 3%) more Zone 3 and three times (25% vs 8%) more Zone 4 injuries compared to the other mechanisms. Upper extremities were involved at twice the rate of other body regions (43% vs 19%). Patients presenting to our burn team over 24 hours after initial injury had infections in 50% of cases – a four-fold increase compared to non-delayed presentations (50% vs 13%). Overall, 45% required surgery (32% grafting, 3% flaps) but 100% of the drug-related blasts needed surgical intervention. Some patients (58%) required ICU admission with the highest rate (83%) in the drug-related group. Conclusions Blast injuries most often required admission for management of the Zone 2 component. Each blast mechanism resulted in distinct distributions of injury although fireworks had the greatest number of Zone 1, 3, and 4 injuries. Firework blasts were often less severe and more likely to present delayed with infectious complications. Larger blast mechanisms including drug-related lab explosions as well as industrial blasts had the highest rates of ICU admission, TBSA, full thickness depth, upper extremity involvement, and need for surgical intervention.

Introduction Burn wound depth assessments are an important component of determining patient prognosis and making appropriate management decisions. Clinical appraisal of the burn wound by an experienced burn surgeon is standard of care but has limitations. Forward-looking Infrared (FLIR) is a new technology in burn care that can provide a non-invasive, quantitative method of evaluating burn wound depth. FLIR utilizes a specialized camera that can capture the infrared emissivity of the skin, and the resulting images can be analyzed to determine burn depth and healing potential of a burn wound. Though FLIR has great potential for burn wound assessment, its use for this has not been well documented. Thus, we have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current use of FLIR technology to assess burn depth and healing potential. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed on PubMed and Google Scholar between June 2020-August 2020 using the following keywords: thermal imaging, FLIR, forward looking infrared, burn, burn depth. Meta-analysis was performed on the mean sensitivity and specificity of the ability of FLIR to predict healing potential. Inclusion criteria were articles investigating the use of FLIR for burn wound assessments in adults, pediatric patients and animal models. Reviews and non-English articles were excluded. Results A total of 11 articles were included in the final review. Statistically significant correlations were found between FLIR and laser doppler imaging (LDI) in 3/3 clinical studies. A case report of a single patient found that FLIR was more accurate than LDI for assessing burn depth. Three articles investigated the ability of FLIR to predict healing potential, with all three reporting statistically significant results. Significant temperature differences between burnt and unburnt skin were found in 2/2 articles. FLIR was compared to clinical assessment by burn surgeons in two articles; one article found that FLIR was more accurate for assessing burn depth, while the other article found that clinical assessment was more accurate for predicting healing potential < 21 days. Mean sensitivity and specificity of the ability of FLIR to determine healing potential < 15 days was 44.5 and 98.8 respectively. Mean sensitivity and specificity of the ability of FLIR to determine healing potential < 21 days was 44.0 and 77.4 respectively. Conclusions FLIR is an accurate, simple, and cost-effective method of burn wound assessment. FLIR has been demonstrated to have significant correlations with other methods of assessing burns such as LDI and can be utilized to accurately assess burn depth and healing potential.