ArticleAnnals of burns and fire disasters2016
Monitoring and treatment of coagulation abnormalities in burn patients. an international survey on current practices.
Article in Annals of burns and fire disasters, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of viscoelastic testing in the transfusion management of burn patients: a scoping review.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- Gastrointestinal insufficiency is a risk factor for severely burned patients: a case-control study among 185 victims in Kunshan explosion.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Article
- Burn-Induced Coagulopathies: a Comprehensive Review.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2020Review
- Cats with thermal burn injuries from California wildfires show echocardiographic evidence of myocardial thickening and intracardiac thrombi.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Management of pain, anxiety, agitation and delirium in burn patients: a survey of clinical practice and a review of the current literature.Annals of burns and fire disasters · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The magnitude of coagulation abnormalities, and the definition and treatment of coagulopathy in burn patients are inadequately understood and continue to be discussed in the literature. We aimed to analyse physicians' views on monitoring and treating coagulation abnormalities in burn patients. A total of 350 questionnaires were distributed electronically to burn ICU physicians. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. Responses were analysed electronically and comparisons were made according to the region of the ICU or the specialty of the physician. Of the 350 questionnaires distributed, 55 (15.7%) were returned. The majority of burn specialists consider sepsis-induced coagulopathy to be the most frequent coagulopathy in burn patients, and 74.5% declare that they do not use any specific definition/scoring system in their department to detect coagulopathy. The majority of specialists (70.8%) use standard coagulation tests. The most frequent indications for plasma transfusion are massive bleeding (32.8%) and Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation syndrome treatment (20%). The main specific factors reported in our study are cryoprecipitate (23.2%) and fibrinogen concentrate (18.9%). 21.1% of respondents state that they do not use any specific coagulation factor substitution in burn patients. Specific coagulation factor substitution is not a routine practice. The low response rate precludes the generalization of our results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28149244PMC5266232W2586404451What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.