Long-term quality of life and cost-effectiveness of treatment of partial thickness burns: A randomized controlled trial comparing enzyme alginogel vs silver sulfadiazine (FLAM study)

Have the recent advancements in wound repair and scar management technology improved the quality of life in burn patients?

BACKGROUND

The negative physical and psychosocial impact of scars, in particular burn scars, has been well documented. Altered personal appearance together with impaired function related to pain, heat intolerance, and contracture formation may last a lifetime and eventually can lead to low self-esteem and poor social and psychological adjustments. Though most patients recover within the first years and many report generally good life satisfaction and moderate quality of life (QoL), some severely burned patients continue to report impaired QoL almost 10 years after injury. It is repeatedly mentioned in the literature that patients' QoL and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) can be improved by improving wound healing and burn scar quality. Determining whether advances in burn wound healing and scar management modalities are positively impacting the lives of surviving patients is the aim of this review.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was used to identify studies measuring QoL of patients surviving severe burn injuries following various interventions to improve burn wound healing and scar quality.

RESULTS

A limited number of studies was identified. Given the limited available data, a narrative review approach including qualitative studies and reviews in addition to identifying common themes, trends, and gaps in the existing literature was deemed more appropriate for a comprehensive analysis.

CONCLUSION

The assumption that progress made in recent decades to improve burn wound healing and scar quality would improve QoL remains largely hypothetical. Except for functional release of burn scar contractures, improved scar aesthetic quality does not necessarily translate into improved QoL of surviving patients. Well-designed comparative studies are largely lacking.

Glucose Oxidase, an Enzyme "Ferrari": Its Structure, Function, Production and Properties in the Light of Various Industrial and Biotechnological Applications

Glucose oxidase (GOx) is an important oxidoreductase enzyme with many important roles in biological processes. It is considered an "ideal enzyme" and is often called an oxidase "Ferrari" because of its fast mechanism of action, high stability and specificity. Glucose oxidase catalyzes the oxidation of β-d-glucose to d-glucono-δ-lactone and hydrogen peroxide in the presence of molecular oxygen. d-glucono-δ-lactone is sequentially hydrolyzed by lactonase to d-gluconic acid, and the resulting hydrogen peroxide is hydrolyzed by catalase to oxygen and water. GOx is presently known to be produced only by fungi and insects. The current main industrial producers of glucose oxidase are Aspergillus and Penicillium. An important property of GOx is its antimicrobial effect against various pathogens and its use in many industrial and medical areas. The aim of this review is to summarize the structure, function, production strains and biophysical and biochemical properties of GOx in light of its various industrial, biotechnological and medical applications.

Health utilities in burn injury survivors: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

An estimated 11 million burn injuries with medical attention occur every year worldwide. Although potentially deadly, burn injuries are now considered a chronic disease with multiple lifetime physical and psychological sequelae. However, it remains unclear how these events affect patients' utility scores. We aimed to conduct a systematic review to summarize the utility scores of burn injury survivors.

METHODS

We conducted on March 18^th, 2020 a systematic review of the published literature using a search strategy designed in collaboration with a research librarian. Our search strategy aimed to identify studies that provided burn injury survivors' utility scores via a standardized indirect instrument.

RESULTS

We identified 15 studies that reported burn injury survivors' utility scores. Most studies used the EQ-5D instruments to assess patients' utility scores. Results varied substantially between studies, ranging from a low of 0.06 to a high of 0.972. Our review identified two key trends. First, utility scores seem to be negatively correlated with the severity of the burn injury. Second, utility scores in adults tend to increase in function of the time since injury.

CONCLUSION

Unfortunately, due to differences in study design and settings, patient populations and instruments used to assess patients' utility scores, we were unable to combine all study results into a single value. In spite of this limit, results we identified support previous trends identified by others regarding the relationship between utility scores and the burn injury severity and/or the time since injury.

To compare the effect of sea buckthorn and silver sulfadiazine dressing on period of wound healing in patients with second-degree burns: A randomized triple-blind clinical trial

Burn injuries can be associated with the incidence of disability and death, yet their management remains a costly difficult problem. We conducted this clinical trial to evaluate the period of wound healing with sea buckthorn dressings for the second-degree burns and compare the results with 1% silver sulfadiazine (SSD) dressings. This randomized triple-blind clinical trial was conducted in a hospital in Isfahan, Iran. Fifty-five patients suffering second-degree burns were recruited through convenient sampling and randomly divided into two groups and treated with either sea buckthorn cream or 1% SSD. Wound dressings were done until complete wound healing was attained. The process of healing burns was monitored using the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool; complete healing was determined by using the standard burn healing checklist. It was deduced that the period of healing second-degree burns in the group treated with sea buckthorn cream was shorter than the group treated with 1% SSD (p < 0.001). The results demonstrated the greater clinical efficacy of sea buckthorn cream over 1% SSD for healing second-degree burns. It was concluded that using sea buckthorn dressing by reducing the period of wound healing can shorten the course of treatment of second-degree burns as well as reduce the burden of care in health care services.

Long-term quality of life and cost-effectiveness of treatment of partial thickness burns: A randomized controlled trial comparing enzyme alginogel vs silver sulfadiazine (FLAM study)

The clinical effectiveness and scar quality of the randomized controlled trial comparing enzyme alginogel with silver sulfadiazine (SSD) for treatment of partial thickness burns were previously reported. Enzyme alginogel did not lead to faster wound healing (primary outcome) or less scar formation. In the current study, the health-related quality of life (HRQoL), costs, and cost-effectiveness of enzyme alginogel compared with SSD in the treatment of partial thickness burns were studied. HRQoL was evaluated using the Burn Specific Health Scale-Brief (BSHS-B) and the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire 1 week before discharge and at 3, 6, and 12 months postburn. Costs were studied from a societal perspective (health care and nonhealth-care costs) for a follow-up period of 1 year. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and comparing differences in societal costs and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) at 1 year postburn. Forty-one patients were analyzed in the enzyme alginogel group and 48 patients in the SSD group. None of the domains of BSHS-B showed a statistically significant difference between the treatment groups. Also, no statistically significant difference in QALYs was found between enzyme alginogel and SSD (difference -0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.09 to 0.03; P = .30). From both the health care and the societal perspective, the difference in costs between enzyme alginogel and SSD was not statistically significant: the difference in health-care costs was €3210 (95% CI, €-1247 to €7667; P = .47) and in societal costs was €3377 (95% CI €-6229 to €12 982; P = .49). The nonsignificant differences in costs and quality-adjusted life-years in favor of SSD resulted in a low probability (<25%) that enzyme alginogel is cost-effective compared to SSD. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in quality of life between both treatment groups. Enzyme alginogel is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with SSD in the treatment of partial thickness burns.