Laura L Jones1, Melanie Calvert1, Naiem Moiemen2, Jonathan J Deeks1, Jonathan Bishop1, Philip Kinghorn1, Jonathan Mathers3. 1. Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK. 2. The Scar Free Foundation Centre for Burns Research, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK. 3. Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK. Electronic address: j.m.mathers@bham.ac.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pressure garment therapy (PGT) is an established treatment for the prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scarring; however, there is limited evidence for its effectiveness. Burn survivors often experience multiple issues many of which are not adequately captured in current PGT trial measures. To assess the effectiveness of PGT it is important to understand what outcomes matter to patients and to consider whether patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can be used to ascertain the effect of treatments on patients' health-related quality of life. This study aimed to (a) understand the priorities and perspectives of adult burns patients and the parents of burns patients who have experienced PGT via in-depth qualitative data, and (b) compare these with the concepts captured within burn-specific PROMs. METHODS: We undertook 40 semi-structured interviews with adults and parents of paediatric and adolescent burns patients who had experienced PGT to explore their priorities and perspectives on scar management. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. The outcomes interpreted within the interview data were then mapped against the concepts captured within burn-specific PROMs currently in the literature. RESULTS: Eight core outcome domains were identified as important to adult patients and parents: (1) scar characteristics and appearance, (2) movement and function, (3) scar sensation, (4) psychological distress, adjustments and a sense of normality, (5) body image and confidence, (6) engagement in activities, (7) impact on relationships, and (8) treatment burden. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome domains presented reflect a complex holistic patient experience of scar management and treatments such as PGT. Some currently available PROMs do capture the concepts described here, although none assess psychological adjustments and attainment of a sense of normality following burn injury. The routine use of PROMs that represent patient experience and their relative contribution to trial outcome assessment versus clinical measures is now a matter for further research and debate. Crown
BACKGROUND: Pressure garment therapy (PGT) is an established treatment for the prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scarring; however, there is limited evidence for its effectiveness. Burn survivors often experience multiple issues many of which are not adequately captured in current PGT trial measures. To assess the effectiveness of PGT it is important to understand what outcomes matter to patients and to consider whether patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can be used to ascertain the effect of treatments on patients' health-related quality of life. This study aimed to (a) understand the priorities and perspectives of adult burns patients and the parents of burns patients who have experienced PGT via in-depth qualitative data, and (b) compare these with the concepts captured within burn-specific PROMs. METHODS: We undertook 40 semi-structured interviews with adults and parents of paediatric and adolescent burns patients who had experienced PGT to explore their priorities and perspectives on scar management. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. The outcomes interpreted within the interview data were then mapped against the concepts captured within burn-specific PROMs currently in the literature. RESULTS: Eight core outcome domains were identified as important to adult patients and parents: (1) scar characteristics and appearance, (2) movement and function, (3) scar sensation, (4) psychological distress, adjustments and a sense of normality, (5) body image and confidence, (6) engagement in activities, (7) impact on relationships, and (8) treatment burden. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome domains presented reflect a complex holistic patient experience of scar management and treatments such as PGT. Some currently available PROMs do capture the concepts described here, although none assess psychological adjustments and attainment of a sense of normality following burn injury. The routine use of PROMs that represent patient experience and their relative contribution to trial outcome assessment versus clinical measures is now a matter for further research and debate. Crown
Authors: Christopher W Noel; Yue Jennifer Du; Elif Baran; David Forner; Zain Husain; Kevin M Higgins; Irene Karam; Kelvin K W Chan; Julie Hallet; Frances Wright; Natalie G Coburn; Antoine Eskander; Lesley Gotlib Conn Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 8.961
Authors: Michelle E Carrière; Kelly A A Kwa; Louise E M de Haas; Anouk Pijpe; Zephanie Tyack; Johannes C F Ket; Paul P M van Zuijlen; Henrica C W de Vet; Lidwine B Mokkink Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2019-09-30
Authors: Jodie Wiseman; Robert S Ware; Megan Simons; Steven McPhail; Roy Kimble; Anne Dotta; Zephanie Tyack Journal: Clin Rehabil Date: 2019-09-30 Impact factor: 3.477
Authors: John Alexander Gerald Gibson; Jeremy Yarrow; Liz Brown; Janine Evans; Simon N Rogers; Sally Spencer; Kayvan Shokrollahi Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-12-30 Impact factor: 2.692
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