775 A Unique Semirigid Silicone Neck Collar for Management of Hypertrophic Scars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction In the realm of burn injuries, the use of rigid hard neck collars, or soft collars, is indispensable for optimizing neck positioning and scar management. However, when injuries encompass the head and neck, a critical challenge arises only one rigid orthosis can typically be worn one at a time. We are introducing a novel solution: a semirigid neck collar crafted from flexible silicone. This collar combines the benefits of semirigid support with the freedom of natural neck and allows jaw movement and may be worn with a rigid facemask. Furthermore, it can be customized to effectively manage hypertrophic scarring, making it a promising advancement in burn injury care. Methods Our semirigid neck collar is crafted with High Consistency Rubber (HCR) silicone. The HCR can be fabricated as a solid sheet or perforated. This HCR applies a gentle, consistent minimum pressure of 20mmHg as displayed by the Kikuhime pressure monitoring device while remaining pliable enough to accommodate natural neck movements and TMJ mobility. The material is mixed, pigment tinted, and rolled to achieve the desired thickness. Following this, the HCR silicone is heated and molded based on a 3D scan of the patient's neck and fit to the patient. A successful trial was conducted in a patient with severe facial and neck burns, resulting in improved neck ROM and hypertrophic scar progression. The resulting scar displayed improvement on the Vancouver Scar Scale yielded as reported on the Likert scale and the patient reporting increased compliance of the semirigid collar. Results In the trial involving a patient with severe neck and facial burns: 1. Improved Neck ROM, Eating, and Mandibular Movement: While using the semirigid silicone neck collar, the patient experienced improvements in neck ROM, eating comfort, and mandibular movement. The average Likert scale rating for these improvements was five out of five. 2. Decreased Scarring upon Vancouver Scar Scale displaying the difference between the initial and final VSS scores, indicating how much the scar improved. 3. Patient Preference: A preference for the semirigid silicone neck collar, upon rating it a perfect five on the Likert scale. The patient was able to wear it in combination with a hard TFO facial orthotic. Conclusions The semirigid silicone neck collar represents a move forward in the field of neck orthosis design, particularly concerning scar management. Its innovative blend of design elements, including flexibility, adaptability, and customizable features, holds great promise for individuals dealing with burn-related neck scarring. Applicability of Research to Practice This semirigid appliance offers increased comfort compared to traditional rigid collars and an option in the management of neck positioning and scar hypertrophy. Its flexible nature, including color-tinting, and cost-effective modification options make it a valuable tool for improving scar management outcomes neck for patients with neck and combined facial/neck scarring.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".