SynthesisInternational wound journal2026
Assessing Hand Function Post-Burn: A Systematic Review of Surgical vs. Enzymatic Debridement Using DASH/Quick-DASH and MHQ Questionnaires.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2026. 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
Hand burns, although often limited in surface area, have a major impact on function and quality of life. Debridement-surgical or enzymatic-is a key component of treatment, with enzymatic debridement increasingly used for its selectivity and potential to preserve viable dermis. To evaluate and compare the functional outcomes of hand burns treated with surgical versus enzymatic debridement, using the DASH/Quick-DASH and Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) assessment tools. A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251034408). Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science without date restrictions. Inclusion criteria focused on studies evaluating hand burn function using DASH, Quick-DASH, or MHQ after enzymatic or surgical debridement in patients aged 16 or older. Methodological quality was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Of 547 studies identified, 7 met inclusion criteria: 4 surgical and 3 enzymatic. Functional recovery was generally better in cases where enzymatic debridement preserved viable dermis and avoided grafting. DASH and MHQ scores favoured enzymatic approaches, especially when conservative management followed debridement. However, methodological limitations and clinical heterogeneity limited direct comparison. Enzymatic debridement, through preservation of viable dermis and reduced grafting need, appears associated with improved functional outcomes in hand burns. Whilst surgical debridement remains essential for deeper burns, enzymatic methods may offer functional advantages and support early rehabilitation in appropriate cases.
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.