Israel Jacqueline S, Greenhalgh David G, Gibson Angela L
From the *Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison; †Division for Burn Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento; and ‡Division of Trauma, Acute Care Surgery, Burn and Surgical Critical Care, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
J Burn Care Res. 2017 Jan/Feb;38(1):e125-e132. doi: 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000475.
It is unknown whether variations in burn care affect outcomes or affect the success of emerging therapeutics. The purpose of this study was to assess burn surgeons' preferences in excision and grafting to determine if surgical technique affects outcomes. A 71-item survey evaluating skin grafting techniques and preferences was emailed to members of the American Burn Association in July and August 2015. The survey was anonymous and voluntary. Relationships between variables were evaluated using Fisher's exact test. A P-value of ≤.05 was deemed statistically significant. The survey was sent to 607 burn surgeons, and the response rate was 24%. Clinical judgment is the most widely used method to determine depth of injury. Surgeons who practice in the United States and surgeons who are board certified in general surgery are more likely to determine depth of the burn based on clinical judgment alone (P < .001). Fifty-six percent of surgeons will perform excision as early as postburn day 1 and 73% will excise greater than 20% TBSA in one setting. Surgeons at centers with bed number of ≤10 (P = .024) or surgeons with board certification in plastic surgery (P = .008) are more likely to excise deep partial-thickness burns with an attempt to retain viable dermis. Geographic location, board certification, and burn unit size all contribute to variations in practice. Strong individual preferences make standardization of therapies challenging and may affect the success of new technologies. Burn surgery continues to be an art as much as a science, and accurate documentation of techniques and outcomes is essential for optimizing successes and documenting failures of new treatment methods.
烧伤护理的差异是否会影响治疗结果或新兴疗法的成功尚不清楚。本研究的目的是评估烧伤外科医生在切除和植皮方面的偏好,以确定手术技术是否会影响治疗结果。2015年7月和8月,一份评估皮肤移植技术和偏好的71项调查问卷通过电子邮件发送给了美国烧伤协会的成员。该调查是匿名且自愿的。使用Fisher精确检验评估变量之间的关系。P值≤0.05被认为具有统计学意义。该调查问卷发送给了607名烧伤外科医生,回复率为24%。临床判断是确定损伤深度最广泛使用的方法。在美国执业的外科医生和获得普通外科委员会认证的外科医生更有可能仅基于临床判断来确定烧伤深度(P<0.001)。56%的外科医生会在烧伤后第1天尽早进行切除,73%的外科医生会在一次手术中切除超过20%的总体表面积。床位≤10的中心的外科医生(P = 0.024)或获得整形外科委员会认证的外科医生(P = 0.008)更有可能切除深Ⅱ度烧伤,试图保留 viable 真皮。地理位置、委员会认证和烧伤病房规模都会导致实践中的差异。强烈的个人偏好使得治疗标准化具有挑战性,可能会影响新技术的成功。烧伤手术既是一门科学,也是一门艺术,准确记录技术和结果对于优化新治疗方法的成功和记录失败至关重要。