ArticleEuropean burn journal2024
Optimising Scar Management Intervention in the Case of a Head-and-Neck Burn for a Patient with a Learning Disability.
Article in European burn journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scars following burns can often prove complex to manage, particularly when crossing joints or special areas such as the head and neck, due to contractures. This case report discusses the individualised care and rehabilitation provided to a burn patient with a learning disability. The patient suffered both full and partial thickness burns equating to a total body surface area (%TBSA) of 7% of the face, neck, and anterior chest via the self-ignition of clothing. Acute treatment was provided at a regional burn unit followed by further in-patient care and rehabilitation at our burn facility. A motion rehabilitation instrument was employed to manage potential orofacial contracture; however, due to the patient's impaired social functioning, this device was found to be unsuitable. Subsequently, a bespoke mouth-opening device replicating an ice lolly was fabricated utilising computer-aided design (CAD), enhancing the patient's understanding along with encouraging independence. Microstomia was a risk in this case; however, this was prevented via the discussed regime, and successful patient rehabilitation was achieved.
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.