ArticleScars, burns & healing
A case series to evaluate burn therapy practices after application of Biodegradable Temporising Matrix (BTM).
Article in Scars, burns & healing. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Evolution in the use of Biodegradable Temporising Matrix (BTM) in our adult burn service prompted an evaluation of our therapy guidelines. Method: We conducted a retrospective case note review of adult burn patients who received BTM between March 2022 and September 2024. Data collected included commencement timing of range of motion (ROM) and ambulation after BTM application, burn and BTM total body surface area (%TBSA) and reason for any BTM loss. Results: The study included 22 patients (23 procedures). Overall, median burn TBSA was 30% with median BTM TBSA of 22% (BTM range 0.1%-70% TBSA). All patients had BTM crossing at least one upper limb (UL) or lower limb (LL) joint. Median time to ROM initiation after BTM was 4.5 days for UL and 2.0 days for LL. Median time to ambulation was 1.0 day overall. Among LL BTM patients intubated for < 7 days, ambulation commenced at a median of 1.5 days. Larger LL BTM areas (>10% TBSA) were slower to mobilise than smaller (<10% TBSA) areas (median 2.5 vs 1.0 days). Partial BTM loss occurred in six cases (26%), though none were attributed to therapy interventions. Conclusion: Therapy guidelines in our burns unit now recommend initiating gentle ROM within 3-5 days after BTM application, and ambulation from day 2-3, even in patients with large LL BTM areas, without negatively impacting BTM integration or timing to SSG.
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.