ArticleAnnals of burns and fire disasters2019
Estimating the cost impact of dressing choice in the context of a mass burns casualty event.
Article in Annals of burns and fire disasters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Direct cost of inpatient wound dressing in South West Nigeria: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Cost of wound dressing: Implication for enrollment into the National Health Insurance scheme, Nigeria.Curationis · 2023Article
- Histone deacetylase inhibitor attenuates intestinal mucosal injury in fatally scalded rats.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Recommendations for burns care in mass casualty incidents: WHO Emergency Medical Teams Technical Working Group on Burns (WHO TWGB) 2017-2020.Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mass casualty burn events (MCBs) require intense and complex management. Silver-infused longer use dressings might help optimise management of burns in an MCB setting. We developed a model estimating the impact of dressing choice in the context of an MCB. The model was developed in Excel in collaboration with experienced emergency response clinicians. The model compares use of silver-infused dressings with use of traditional dressings in patients with partial thickness burns covering 30% of their body. Costs were estimated from a UK perspective as a proxy for a funded emergency response team and limited to cost of dressings, bandages, padding, analgesia and staff time. Expected patient costs and resource use were summarised over an acute 2-week intervention period and extrapolated to estimate possible time savings in a hypothetical MCB. Per patient costs were estimated at £2,002 (silver) and £1,124 (traditional) (a daily additional spend of £63). Per patient staff time was estimated at 864 minutes (silver) and 1,200 minutes (traditional) (a daily time saving of 24 minutes). Multiplying up to a possible MCB population of 20 could result in a saving equivalent to 9 staff shifts over the 2-week intervention period. The model was sensitive to type of silver dressing, frequency of dressing change and staff costs. We found increased costs through use of silver dressings but time savings that might help optimise burns management in an MCB. Exploring the balance between costs and staff time might help future MCB response preparation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32313537PMC7155402W3028259863What 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.