MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411234768 · doi:10.3390/ebj6020036

Hand Function Recovers to Near Normal in Patients with Deep Dermal Hand Burns Treated with Enzymatic Debridement: A Prospective Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4411234768 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kelly Aranka Ayli Kwa, Annika Catherina Reuvers, Jorien Borst-van Breugel, Anouk Pijpe, Paul P. M. van Zuijlen, Roelf S. Breederveld, Annebeth Meij‐de Vries

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Burn Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studySurgeryQuality of life (healthcare)CohortRange of motionDebridement (dental)Burn centerPhysical therapyPoison controlEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short- and long-term hand function was evaluated in adult patients with deep dermal and full-thickness hand burns after treatment with enzymatic debridement (NexoBrid® MediWound Ltd., Yavne, Israel), assessing the results at discharge and 3, 6, and 12 months post-burn. This prospective cohort study was performed in the Burn Center in Beverwijk between March 2017 and December 2019. Hand function was assessed using Modified Kapandji Index scores, the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test, and range of motion; scar quality using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale version 2.0; and quality of life using the Quick Disability Arm Shoulder Hand Questionnaire and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Ten patients (14 hand burns) were included. The need for a skin graft after NexoBrid® was 86%, and 50% needed additional surgical excision before skin grafting. Digits 3 and 4 achieved near-to-normal total active motion, and at least 50% of the hands achieved a normal range within the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test in four items at 12 months post-burn. Scar quality and quality of life improved significantly over time. The present study can be considered as a proof-of-concept study for future clinical trials on enzymatic debridement for hand burns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Burn JournalSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207