BACKGROUND: This overview critically compares subjective assessment tools and available objective measurement tools with potential devices becoming available. Our goal is to lay out the benefits of each scar assessment scale in order to propose good management skills for scars along with strong metric skills. METHODS: Classifying a scar is important in daily clinical practice. Ultimately choosing which treatment modality best fits can become a challenge. Scar classification needs a more detailed and systematic approach. We researched all different factors contributing to scar formation to come up with a more detailed criteria. Such factors included pigmentation/vascularity, surface texture, surface area, thickness (scar height), and pliability. RESULTS: Few studies have assessed scars; each provided an assessment scale of their own. Each scale is compared on the basis of accuracy, reliability, convenience in terms of feasibility and price. CONCLUSIONS: There remains still no ideal objective measurement out there despite promise seen in subjective evaluation. Method refinement will however accelerate our knowledge and interventions - based on increasing study power with enhanced metrics.
BACKGROUND: This overview critically compares subjective assessment tools and available objective measurement tools with potential devices becoming available. Our goal is to lay out the benefits of each scar assessment scale in order to propose good management skills for scars along with strong metric skills. METHODS: Classifying a scar is important in daily clinical practice. Ultimately choosing which treatment modality best fits can become a challenge. Scar classification needs a more detailed and systematic approach. We researched all different factors contributing to scar formation to come up with a more detailed criteria. Such factors included pigmentation/vascularity, surface texture, surface area, thickness (scar height), and pliability. RESULTS: Few studies have assessed scars; each provided an assessment scale of their own. Each scale is compared on the basis of accuracy, reliability, convenience in terms of feasibility and price. CONCLUSIONS: There remains still no ideal objective measurement out there despite promise seen in subjective evaluation. Method refinement will however accelerate our knowledge and interventions - based on increasing study power with enhanced metrics.
Authors: Trenton Custis; April W Armstrong; Thomas H King; Victoria R Sharon; Daniel B Eisen Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Andrew J Bower; Ziad Mahmassani; Youbo Zhao; Eric J Chaney; Marina Marjanovic; Min Kyung Lee; Benedikt W Graf; Michael De Lisio; Hyunjoon Kong; Marni D Boppart; Stephen A Boppart Journal: Tissue Eng Part C Methods Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 3.056
Authors: Regina M Fearmonti; Jennifer E Bond; Detlev Erdmann; L Scott Levin; Salvatore V Pizzo; Howard Levinson Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Noel Edward Donlon; P A Boland; M E Kelly; K Schmidt; F Cooke; P M Neary; K M Barry; J V Reynolds Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2019-09-16 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Stefani Kappel; Rebecca Kleinerman; Thomas H King; Raja Sivamani; Sandra Taylor; UyenThao Nguyen; Daniel B Eisen Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2015-01-23 Impact factor: 11.527