ArticlePloS one2025
Epidermal necrolysis (Stevens-Johnson syndrome/ toxic epidermal necrolysis) as extensive boundary violation: A qualitative study on the illness experience and care needs of survivors in the context of the first German guideline.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn response to considerable heterogeneity in German healthcare for patients with epidermal necrolysis (EN; also Stevens-Johnson syndrome/ toxic epidermal necrolysis), a national guideline was developed. However, no patient initiatives were identified to represent patient preferences, which have yet to be systematically evaluated in Germany.
objectiveWe conducted a qualitative study on EN survivors' experiences to collect contextualised data on patient preferences and identify potential shortcomings and untapped potentials in routine care.
methodsWe contacted 14 participants who were either survivors of EN or family members of survivors. After recruitment and obtaining informed consent, we conducted individual and dyadic interviews using a semi-structured guide developed in a preceding focus group with the same patient collective. Following grounded theory principles, recruitment was contingent on emerging themes. In our analysis, we coded interview data into thematic categories of increasing abstraction, resulting in a conceptual framework accounting for universal features of the illness experience.
resultsFrom survivors' perspectives, EN represents a profound transgression or destabilisation of personal and interpersonal boundaries, affecting several fundamental areas of human experience. Even after returning to domestic life, survivors report physical limitations that, despite their perceived invisibility to their social environment, lead to permanent changes in self-concept and personal values. Conversely, the majority of participants emphasised restoring lost boundaries in leading an authentic and meaningful life and counteracting social alienation. The study identifies five key dimensions of boundary violations caused by EN and four areas where healthcare providers can help restore boundaries to facilitate successful coping.
conclusionHealthcare providers should be mindful of life-altering implications of EN and how debilitating illness sequelae can affect survivors beyond a transient emergency. Optimal medical care should facilitate stabilising lost boundaries over the entire recovery period and requires a sensitivity to existential aspects of the disease only accessible through a sustained dialog with patients and family members.
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.