Effect of Physiotherapy Protocol on Post Burn Upper Limbs' Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Burns of the hand have devastating consequences not only for the functional outcome but also for the esthetic appearance. Post burn functional disabilities of the upper extremity are better prevented than treated. Aim: this study aimed to evaluate the effect of physiotherapy protocol on upper limbs’ function post burn. Design: A quasi-experimental (time series) design submitted to meet the aim of the study. Subjects: A purposive sample of 27 male and female adult patients with 2nd degree burn in hand assigned in the current study which was carried out in Burn Department and its outpatient clinic of General hospital at Minia city. Tools: Four tools were utilized to collect data of this study; demographic questionnaire, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Scale (DASH), Manual Muscle testing, and Vancouver Scar Assessment Scale (VSS). Results: Twenty seven adult 2nd degree burned patients with mean age 36.0 ± 11.22 are included in the study. Gradual improvement of the upper limbs' function measured through DASH scale was observed after application of physiotherapy protocol, this appear through significant decrease in complain from severe dysfunction among 25.9% after 2 months to 0% after 6 months; significant increase in muscle force (22.2%, 59.3%) and prominent improvement of burn scar measured by VSS. Conclusions: The data suggest that the upper limbs' function post burns can be improved by preventive nursing interventions including early range of motion, anti-contracture positioning and splinting of hand which has positive effects on burn scar. Recommendations: regular training programs to keep nurses in burn units updated with the evidence-based practices and array interventions for reducing burn scar and improving limbs' function and therefore patients' productivity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".