The treatment effect of operative intervention for flame versus scald burns in resource-limited settings.

INTRODUCTION

In resource-limited environments, it is critical to triage burn patients most likely to benefit from operative intervention. This study sought to identify patients with a more significant treatment effect after operative intervention following burn injury at a tertiary burn center in Lilongwe, Malawi.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of burn patients presenting to Kamuzu Central Hospital from 2011 to November 2022. We compared patients based on whether they had scald or flame burns. Using logistic regression, we estimated the adjusted treatment effect of operative intervention on in-hospital mortality. Operative intervention was defined as burn excision and debridement with or without skin grafting.

RESULTS

We included 3266 patients. 2099 (64.7 %) patients had a scald burn, and 1144 (35.3 %) had a flame burn. 630 patients (19.3 %) underwent surgery. Crude mortality among all patients was 18.1 %, and for patients who underwent surgery, it was 9.7 %. When adjusted for total body surface area burned (TBSA) and age, the average treatment effect of surgery on mortality was - 0.07 (95 % CI - 0.11, - 0.033) for patients with scald burns and - 0.17 (95 % CI - 0.22, - 0.11) for patients with flame burns (Fig. 1). For patients with flame burns, the adjusted odds ratio of death associated with surgery was 0.26 (95 % CI 0.17, 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Operative intervention confers a survival advantage for patients with flame burns, and the average treatment effect was more significant compared to patients with scald burns. In general, in resource-limited environments flame burns should be prioritized for surgery over scald burns to improve patient outcomes.