129 Are There Differences in Scar Assessments as a Function of Fitzpatrick Skin Type
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Skin type, as organized within the Fitzpatrick scale, may be an important variable in scar severity. Fitzpatrick skin type II (FST-II) and Fitzpatrick skin type V (FST-V) were chosen, to compare scar outcomes of lighter and darker skin patients with burn injuries. It was hypothesized that patients with FST-V skin have worse scar outcomes than patients with FST-II skin. Methods Demographic variables were obtained from the EMR including patient age, age of scar at time of assessment, gender, etiology of burn injury, and location of injury for this retrospective chart review. A variety of scar assessment scales and non-invasive measurements of scar qualities were administered during visits with the rehabilitation team around 4 months post-burn. These included The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) which was broken up into: POSAS-Observer (O) avg, POSAS-Patient (P) Itch, POSAS-P Pain, and POSAS-P avg. This evaluation also included the Vancouver Scar Scales (VSS), and pliability, erythema, and melanin objective measurements. Results Thirty patients were included in the analysis, 15 in each group. In FST-II, 53% of subjects were female, 47% were male. In FST-V, 33% of patients were male, while 67% were female (p>0.05). There are no significant differences in categorical patient age ( 42.2±4.6 vs 45.6±4). Approximately 67% of FST-II patients had flame burns, 33% scald injuries. Similarly 62% of FST-V subjects had flame burns, and 38% had scald injuries. The location of injuries was variable in both groups, but not different among groups. Scars were evaluated at 3.7±0.3 months with a range from 1-8 months post-burn and this evaluation time was not different between groups. For observer driven scar assessment (POSAS-O avg and VSS), there were no differences in scores between the groups (6.2±0.4 vs. 6.1±0.4 and 6.1±0.4 vs. 5.8±0.5). POSAS-P Itch scores and Melanin levels were higher in FST-V (7.3±0.6 vs. 5.3±0.7, p< 0.05, 896.4±9.5 vs. 727.2±9.8, p< 0.0001). Erythema was higher in FST-II (463.7±6.4 vs. 398.7±11.4, p< 0.0001). There was no statistical difference in POSAS-P Pain or pliability scores between FST-II and FST-V groups. Conclusions These findings suggest that patients rate their scars as being equally morbid regardless of skin type. There may be a correlation between higher melanin levels and pruritis in burn scars. Although scars in darker patients is thought to result in worse outcomes, the data shows that observers rate them equally. These findings bring into question the validity of current scar assessment scales and whether they adequately measure scars within different FST groups. Applicability of Research to Practice Performance of current scar scales in different skin types could affect treatment decisions. New metrics may need to be added to current scar assessment tools.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».