Idriss Nayla, Maibach Howard I
Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Skin Res Technol. 2009 Feb;15(1):1-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.2008.00327.x.
This overview critically compares subjective assessment tools and available objective measurement tools with potential devices becoming available. Our goal is to lay out the benefits of each scar assessment scale in order to propose good management skills for scars along with strong metric skills.
Classifying a scar is important in daily clinical practice. Ultimately choosing which treatment modality best fits can become a challenge. Scar classification needs a more detailed and systematic approach. We researched all different factors contributing to scar formation to come up with a more detailed criteria. Such factors included pigmentation/vascularity, surface texture, surface area, thickness (scar height), and pliability.
Few studies have assessed scars; each provided an assessment scale of their own. Each scale is compared on the basis of accuracy, reliability, convenience in terms of feasibility and price.
There remains still no ideal objective measurement out there despite promise seen in subjective evaluation. Method refinement will however accelerate our knowledge and interventions - based on increasing study power with enhanced metrics.
本综述对主观评估工具、现有的客观测量工具以及可能出现的潜在设备进行了批判性比较。我们的目标是阐述每种瘢痕评估量表的益处,以便提出针对瘢痕的良好管理技巧以及强大的测量技巧。
在日常临床实践中,对瘢痕进行分类很重要。最终选择最适合的治疗方式可能会成为一项挑战。瘢痕分类需要更详细、系统的方法。我们研究了导致瘢痕形成的所有不同因素,以得出更详细的标准。这些因素包括色素沉着/血管分布、表面质地、表面积、厚度(瘢痕高度)和柔韧性。
很少有研究对瘢痕进行评估;每项研究都提供了自己的评估量表。根据准确性、可靠性、可行性和价格方面的便利性对每个量表进行了比较。
尽管主观评估有前景,但目前仍没有理想的客观测量方法。然而,方法的改进将加快我们基于增强测量手段提高研究力度的知识和干预措施。