Di Serio Sara, Congiu Matteo, Minnucci Silvia, Scalise Valentina, Mourad Firas
Department of Clinical Science and Translational Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy.
Department of Neuromotor Rehabilitation, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, 20145 Milan, Italy.
J Clin Med. 2025 Aug 22;14(17):5920. doi: 10.3390/jcm14175920.
Scar impairments impose a significant economic burden and negatively impact an individual's well-being and quality of life. However, there is a lack of standardization in physical therapy interventions for scar management. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of studies addressing non-invasive physical therapy interventions for scar management. This scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Six databases were searched, and additional studies were retrieved through gray literature and the reference lists of included articles. All studies considering non-invasive physical therapy interventions for scar management were included. No restrictions were applied regarding time, context or publication type. Results were illustrated using descriptive statistics and summarized in an infographic. Out of 13,419 initial records, 92 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most articles were narrative reviews ( = 41) followed by randomized controlled trials (RCT) ( = 18). The most reported interventions were pressure therapy ( = 41), physical therapy modalities ( = 37), silicone-based products ( = 29) and massage ( = 20). Scar management involves a wide range of physical interventions. However, research has predominantly focused on adults, particularly those with burns, with limited attention given to pediatric or non-adult populations. Furthermore, there is significant variability in the application parameters, scar localization and size. Examining the included study designs, most of the research presented reduced sample sizes and lacked control groups. Notably, almost half of the studies were based on expert opinions. Future high-quality research is needed to identify evidence-based interventions for the clinical management of scars.
瘢痕损伤带来了巨大的经济负担，并对个人的幸福感和生活质量产生负面影响。然而，瘢痕管理的物理治疗干预缺乏标准化。本研究旨在全面概述针对瘢痕管理的非侵入性物理治疗干预的研究。本范围综述是按照乔安娜·布里格斯研究所（JBI）证据综合手册进行的。检索了六个数据库，并通过灰色文献和纳入文章的参考文献列表获取了其他研究。纳入了所有考虑非侵入性物理治疗干预瘢痕管理的研究。对时间、背景或出版类型没有限制。结果用描述性统计进行说明，并汇总在一张信息图中。在13419条初始记录中，92项研究符合纳入标准。大多数文章是叙述性综述（n = 41），其次是随机对照试验（RCT）（n = 18）。报道最多的干预措施是压力疗法（n = 41）、物理治疗方式（n = 37）、硅基产品（n = 29）和按摩（n = 20）。瘢痕管理涉及广泛的物理干预。然而，研究主要集中在成年人，特别是烧伤患者，对儿童或非成人人群的关注有限。此外，在应用参数、瘢痕定位和大小方面存在显著差异。检查纳入的研究设计，大多数研究样本量减少且缺乏对照组。值得注意的是，几乎一半的研究基于专家意见。未来需要高质量的研究来确定基于证据的瘢痕临床管理干预措施。
