ArticleJournal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association2022
Patient Reported Experiences at a Swedish National Burn Centre.
Article in Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Quality indicators for hospital burn care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that burn patients were satisfied with the received care. Satisfaction was not strongly associated to burns or to psycho-social characteristics, suggesting that other factors, related to burn care specific aspects, may be important. The aim of this study was to analyze the independent effect of provided workload on the general satisfaction in adult patients at a Swedish national Burn Centre. The study population (n = 122) included patients ≥18 years, treated at the Linköping Burn Centre between 2016 and 2017. Experienced burn care was evaluated with the PS-RESKA survey (score range: 0-4), and provided workload was scored with the Burn Scoring System (BSC). Groups were compared with χ 2 test, MW test, or Fisher´s exact test. Multivariable logistic regression analyzed the independent effect of BSC on the outcome High Satisfaction (= score ≥3 to the survey-question: "How would you score your global experience at the Burn Centre?"). In-patients (n = 60) had more often larger burns and required more workload than out-patients (median[IQR]: TBSA% = 6.3 [3-12.3] % vs. 0.7 [0.3-2] %, p < .001; BSC = 65 [25.5-135.5] vs. 6 [4-9], p < .001). Both groups were highly satisfied with the experienced care (mean score [SD] = 3.68 [0.57] vs. 3.41 [0.77], p = .03). Neither characteristics of the patients (age, sex), nor TBSA% nor provided workload (BSC) were independently associated with High Satisfaction. Regardless of burn severity, demographics and provided workload, adult patients with burns were highly satisfied with the experienced burn care. This finding suggested that the reason of the satisfaction was multifactorial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.