ArticlePloS one2024
Characteristics, treatments and outcomes in patients with severe burn wounds; a 10 year cohort study on acute and reconstructive treatment.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Burn Wound Infections With Staphylococcus aureus: Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors for Methicillin-Resistant Strains.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Scar Quality After Burns in Relation to Skin Type, Classified by Device-Based Colour Measurement, as an Alternative for the Fitzpatrick Questionnaire.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Development of a predictive model for the relationship between serum pan-immunoinflammatory index levels and scar formation in facial burn patients.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reports on treatment characteristics and long term outcomes for severe burns are scarce, while the need to compare outcomes of novel treatment modalities to standard of care is increasing. Our national database on burn treatment enabled analysis of patient as well as treatment characteristics during acute treatment and following reconstructive procedures. Furthermore, outcome data of longitudinal scar assessments were analysed from a single burn centre database. Acute and reconstructive data were analysed for patients admitted to the three Dutch burn centres with total body surface area burned of ≥ 20% TBSA. Long term outcome was analysed from a single centre scar database, both for a period of 2009-2019. Treatment characteristics from 396 surviving acute burn patients were analysed. Surgical treatment was required in 89.6% of these patients and 110 patients (27.8%) needed reconstructive surgery in the years after the burn incident, with a mean of 4.4 reconstructive procedures per patient. Main indications were contractures (70.5%) and arms (45.0%) and head and neck region (41.2%) were most frequently affected. Techniques used for reconstructive corrections were predominantly excision, release and flaps (54.7%), followed by skin transplants (32.4%). Scar quality was significantly worse in patients with more severe burns compared to those with TBSA < 20% during prolonged times. These data provide insight into health care utilization, treatment characteristics and outcomes in severely burned patients. These real-world data can guide future development of improved treatment strategies for at risk patients as well as anatomical locations.
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.