H Goei1, C H van der Vlies2, W E Tuinebreijer3, P P M van Zuijlen4, E Middelkoop5, M E van Baar6. 1. Association of Dutch Burn Centres, Burn Centre Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, MOVE Research Institute, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: goeih@maasstadziekenhuis.nl. 2. Burn Centre, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: vliesc@maasstadziekenhuis.nl. 3. Association of Dutch Burn Centres, Burn Centre Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, The Netherlands. Electronic address: wetuineb@knmg.nl. 4. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, MOVE Research Institute, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Association of Dutch Burn Centres, Burn Centre Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, The Netherlands; Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, The Netherlands. Electronic address: paulvanzuijlen@me.com. 5. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, MOVE Research Institute, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Association of Dutch Burn Centres, Burn Centre Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, The Netherlands. Electronic address: emiddelkoop@burns.nl. 6. Association of Dutch Burn Centres, Burn Centre Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: baarm@maasstadziekenhuis.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the predictive validity of the Patient and Observer Assessment Scale (POSAS), in order to determine whether it can be used to predict final scar quality. METHODS: Patients with a maximum TBSA burned of 20% who were treated in a Dutch burn center and participated in two scar assessments at 3 months and >18 months post-burn were included. Scar quality assessment consisted of the POSAS, Dermaspectrometer® (color) and Cutometer® (elasticity). Predictive validity was determined in three ways: (1) the discriminative ability to distinguish good from reduced long term scar quality, (2) correlations between POSAS items score at the two subsequent assessments and (3) linear regression was conducted to identify POSAS items as independent predictors. Additionally, reliability, construct validity and interpretability were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 141 patients were included with a mean TBSA burned of 5.2% (±4.5). The ability of the Patient scale to discriminate between good and reduced long term scar quality was adequate with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.728 (CI 0.640-0.804), the ability of the Observer scale was good with an AUC of 0.854 (CI 0.781-0.911). Correlations between items scored T3 and T>18 were at least adequate. On item level, pain and stiffness (Patient) and pliability and relief (Observer) were identified as significant predictors for reduced long term scar quality. The POSAS was reliable, construct validity was adequate at three months but declined at >18 months. CONCLUSION: This study found that final scar quality can be adequately predicted by an early POSAS assessment at three months.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the predictive validity of the Patient and Observer Assessment Scale (POSAS), in order to determine whether it can be used to predict final scar quality. METHODS:Patients with a maximum TBSA burned of 20% who were treated in a Dutch burn center and participated in two scar assessments at 3 months and >18 months post-burn were included. Scar quality assessment consisted of the POSAS, Dermaspectrometer® (color) and Cutometer® (elasticity). Predictive validity was determined in three ways: (1) the discriminative ability to distinguish good from reduced long term scar quality, (2) correlations between POSAS items score at the two subsequent assessments and (3) linear regression was conducted to identify POSAS items as independent predictors. Additionally, reliability, construct validity and interpretability were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 141 patients were included with a mean TBSA burned of 5.2% (±4.5). The ability of the Patient scale to discriminate between good and reduced long term scar quality was adequate with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.728 (CI 0.640-0.804), the ability of the Observer scale was good with an AUC of 0.854 (CI 0.781-0.911). Correlations between items scored T3 and T>18 were at least adequate. On item level, pain and stiffness (Patient) and pliability and relief (Observer) were identified as significant predictors for reduced long term scar quality. The POSAS was reliable, construct validity was adequate at three months but declined at >18 months. CONCLUSION: This study found that final scar quality can be adequately predicted by an early POSAS assessment at three months.
Authors: Jennifer Lynn Schiefer; Genoveva Friederike Aretz; Paul Christian Fuchs; Mahsa Bagheri; Martin Funk; Alexandra Schulz; Marc Daniels Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 3.099
Authors: Jennifer Lynn Schiefer; Janine Andreae; Paul Christian Fuchs; Rolf Lefering; Paul Immanuel Heidekrueger; Alexandra Schulz; Mahsa Bagheri Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-05-18 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Rowan W Sanderson; Qi Fang; Andrea Curatolo; Aiden Taba; Helen M DeJong; Fiona M Wood; Brendan F Kennedy Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2021-05-06 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Tobias Kisch; Felix H Stang; Peter Mailaender; Sophie Schleusser; Dominik Michel; Rainer Trieb; Sebastian Bannwarth; Simone Maly; Anika Dallmann; Sebastian Klasen; Christian Kaiser; Timo Schmeltzpfenning; Wolfgang Rempp; Martin Lades; Dominik Šurc; Boris Bauer; Alexander Artschwager; Reinhard Vonthein Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2021-07-15
Authors: Inge Spronk; Anniek Stortelers; Cornelis H van der Vlies; Paul P M van Zuijlen; Anouk Pijpe Journal: Wound Repair Regen Date: 2021-06-16 Impact factor: 3.617