320 A National Survey Regarding Utilization of the Burn Therapist in the Operating Theater
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical and Occupational Therapists (PT/OT) are experts in biomechanics and deliver care through various modalities including range of motion (ROM), mobility, positioning, and splinting. Burn therapists have enhanced knowledge and experience with cutaneokinematics and are an integral part of the burn multidisciplinary team. Traditional rehabilitation therapies are performed at the bedside or in an outpatient setting, but burn care offers different venues. The operating room (OR) provides opportunity to deliver burn specific therapist interventions. The purpose of this survey was to describe the current practices and opinions of burn therapists regarding their roles delivering therapy care in the OR. An internet-based 11-item survey was distributed to burn therapists at North American burn centers and units. Descriptive statistics were performed. There were 52 respondents, 79% of whom worked at verified burn centers. All regions were represented including Canada, with the majority coming from the Western Region (33%) followed by the Northeast Region (23%). Interventions in the OR were performed by 92% of respondents and included ROM (81%), splinting (79%), graft management (35%), positioning (31%), dressing changes (23%), and wound care (15%). Twenty one percent of respondents performed all activities. The majority (71%) of therapist surveyed did not assist with the transfer of patients in the OR nor the positioning of limbs for autografting (65%). Most therapists (95%) were able to have open dialogue with providers and 70% were able to request procedural sedation and/or sedation vacation for therapy interventions. While 90% of respondents felt that it was beneficial to be in the OR, 35% did identify cost as a concern governing therapy time and availability in the OR. Encouragingly, 92% of respondents indicated involvement in the operative environment. More than half of respondents indicate involvement in range of motion and splinting. Interestingly, substantially fewer respondents indicated performing patient positioning or positioning for graft management. Our survey results suggest that while the majority of burn therapist respondents are extending the multidisciplinary model of care into the OR, they are typically delivering traditional therapy modalities when in the operating theater. Further research is warranted to explore variables contributing to this phenomenon. While burn therapists who responded to our survey are routinely involved in the OR, their knowledge of cutaneokinematics and biomechanics may not be fully utilized in the operative environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".