The effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave therapy on hypertrophic scar appearance and hand mobility in a severe burn patient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After a burn injury, the development of hypertrophic scars may limit the ranges of movement of the involved joints and cause severe disturbance to appearance and daily function of the patient, especially when the burn region involves hands. The use of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) on the treatment of hypertrophic scars has been risen in the recent decade. The most recent systematic review by Aguilera-Sáez et al. has demonstrated improvements in hypertrophic scar appearance, pain and pruritus after a course of ESWT. Hence, ESWT was included in treating our severe burn case. To share the local experience and evaluate the effectiveness of ESWT on hypertrophic scar appearance and functional hand mobility in a severe burn patient. A patient suffered from a flame burn involving 27% total body surface area and predominantly full thickness skin burn was recruited at a local physiotherapy out-patient clinic. At post-injury 4 months, right hand flexor retinaculum and left 2nd-5th metacarpophalangeal joints (MCPJs) were chosen as the ESWT sites due to contractures limiting mobility and hand function. At a frequency of once to twice per week, 13 sessions with 2000 shots each session were performed on the right hand flexor retinaculum over 10 weeks, whilst 10 sessions with 1000 shots at each MCPJ per session were done on the left hand across 8 weeks. The parameters of ESWT were: 0 mm penetration depth, 0.124–0.142 J/mm2 energy flux density, and 8 Hz frequency. The outcomes were measured at pre- and post-treatment course of ESWT. The primary outcome measure was the scar appearance measured by Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). The secondary outcome measure was the functional ranges of movement of fingers, Kapandji score and Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS). A marked improvement in scar appearance on clinical photos was shown on both hands after a course of ESWT with 2 to 3-point deduction on VSS. On the scale of modified VSS, the 6-point reduction on the right hand scar exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), while the left hand scar also showed a 2-point improvement. Fingers’ ranges of movements also increased by 5 cm in thumb abduction, 20 degrees in MCPJs’ flexion and 3 points in Kapandji score. The patient regained the ability to grasp a cup with 5-mark improvement in PSFS exceeding the MCID. The use of ESWT on the hypertrophic scar improves scar appearance and functional mobility in a severe burn patient. ESWT on burn patients should be considered as one of the treatment modalities and the field for further research.
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".