The Effect of Surgical Intervention on Pediatric Burn Injury Survival in a Resource-Poor Setting

INTRODUCTION

Burns are one of the most common injuries sustained globally. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are disproportionately affected by burn injury morbidity and mortality; African children have the highest burn mortality globally. In high-income countries, early surgical intervention has shown to improve survival. However, when applied to burn victims in LMICs, improved survival in the early excision cohort (≤5 d) was not seen. Therefore, we aimed to determine the magnitude of the effect of surgical intervention on burn injury survival.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected data, utilizing the Kamuzu Central Hospital Burn Database from May 2011 to July 2019, was performed. Pediatric patients (≤12 y) were included. Patients were excluded if they underwent surgical intervention for nonacute burn care management. Bivariate analyses stratifying by type of surgical intervention was performed, comparing demographics, burn characteristics, surgical intervention, and patient mortality. Standardized estimates were adjusted using the inverse-probability of treatment weights to account for confounding. Weighted logistic regression modeling was performed to determine the odds of mortality based on if a patient underwent surgical intervention.

RESULTS

During the study, 2364 patients were seen at the Kamuzu Central Hospital, 1785 (75.5%) were children ≤12 y who met inclusion criteria. In the overall cohort, 342 (19.2%) underwent operations, including split-thickness skin graft (n = 196, 57.3%), debridement (n = 116, 33.9%), escharotomy (n = 19, 5.6%), and amputation (n = 1, 0.3%). The surgery cohort was older (4.2 ± 3.1 versus 3.1 ± 2.6 y, P < 0.001) with larger percent total body surface area burns (16%, interquartile range: 10-24 versus 13%, interquartile range: 8-20, P < 0.001) than those who did not have surgery. In the propensity score-weighted logistic regression predicting survival, patients undergoing surgery after burn injury had an increased odds of survival (odds ratio: 5.24, 95% confidence interval: 2.40-11.44, P = 0.003) when compared with patients not undergoing surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In this propensity-weighted analysis, surgical intervention following burn injury increases the odds of survival by a factor of 5.24 when compared with patients not undergoing surgical intervention. Efforts to enhance burn infrastructure to deliver surgical care is imperative to attenuate burn mortality in resource-poor settings.

Geographic access to burn center hospitals

CONTEXT

The delivery of burn care is a resource-intensive endeavor that requires specialized personnel and equipment. The optimal geographic distribution of burn centers has long been debated; however, the current distribution of centers relative to geographic area and population is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the proportion of the US population living within 1 and 2 hours by rotary air transport (helicopter) or ground transport of a burn care facility.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A cross-sectional analysis of geographic access to US burn centers utilizing the 2000 US census, road and speed limit data, the Atlas and Database of Air Medical Services database, and the 2008 American Burn Association Directory.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The proportion of state, regional, and national population living within 1 and 2 hours by air transport or ground transport of a burn care facility.

RESULTS

In 2008, there were 128 self-reported burn centers in the United States including 51 American Burn Association-verified centers. An estimated 25.1% and 46.3% of the US population live within 1 and 2 hours by ground transport, respectively, of a verified burn center. By air, 53.9% and 79.0% of the population live within 1 and 2 hours, respectively, of a verified center. There was significant regional variation in access to verified burn centers by both ground and rotary air transport. The greatest proportion of the population with access was highest in the northeast region and lowest in the southern United States.

CONCLUSION

Nearly 80% of the US population lives within 2 hours by ground or rotary air transport of a verified burn center; however, there is both state and regional variation in geographic access to these centers.

Current approach to burn critical care

Burn trauma is a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality all over the world. Advancements in resuscitation, surgical tecniques, infection control and nutritional/metaolic support decreased mortality and morbidity. This article intends to review current outlines for initial treatment and resuscitation nutritional/metabolic support and wound management peculiar to burn patients.

Current status of burn care facilities: A nationwide survey

The problems associated with burn injuries are wide-ranging, and the social and economic impacts of burns affect all of society. Only burn units have the capability to properly care for these patients, and this specialization translates to increased costs. The aim of this study was to examine the current status of burn units in Turkey. There are no reliable epidemiological data on burns and burn units in our country, so we conducted our own survey. In March 2003, Turkey had 1198 hospitals with 159,290 patient beds. To collect data related to burn care centers, we mailed a questionnaire to every hospital (974 total sent) and a different questionnaire to every City Health Directorate (81 total sent). Seven hundred and seventy-seven hospitals (79.8%) responded, and the results indicate that the number of burn care centers has risen significantly in the past decade. At most centers, plastic-reconstructive surgeons and general surgeons are the physicians who care for burn patients. The survey findings indicate that Turkey needs many more burn centers, and also better quality units. In addition, in-service training of health care professionals is required. As well, a curriculum should be developed for continuous public education geared towards burn prevention and first aid.

Tracking the Daily Availability of Burn Beds for National Emergencies

Medical planning for Operation Iraqi Freedom included predictive models of expected number of burn casualties. In all but the best-case scenario, casualty estimates exceeded the capacity of the only Department of Defense burn center. Examination of existing federal-civilian disaster plans for military hospital augmentation revealed that bed availability data were neither timely nor accurate. Recognizing the need for accurate knowledge of burn bed availability, the Department of Defense requested assistance from the American Burn Association (ABA). Directors of burn centers in the United States were queried for interest in participation in a mass casualty plan to provide overflow burn bed capacity. A list of 70 participating burn centers was devised based upon proximity to planned military embarkation points. A computer tracking program was developed. Daily automated e-mail messages requesting bed status were sent to burn center directors at 6 am Central time with responses requested before 11 am. The collated list of national overflow burn bed capacity was e-mailed each day to the ABA Central Office and to federal and military agencies involved with burn patient triage and transportation. Once automated, this task required only 1-2 hours a day. Available burn-bed lists were generated daily between March 17 and May 2, 2003 and then every other day until May 9, 2003. A total of 2151 responses were received (mean, 43 burn centers per day). A system to track daily nationwide burn bed availability was successfully implemented. Although intended for military conflict, this system is equally applicable to civilian mass casualty situations. We advocate adoption of this or a similar bed tracking system by the ABA for use during burn mass casualty incidents.

Developing a regional and national burn disaster response

The supplement on burns by the National Disaster Medical System (NDMS) requires an evaluation of burn centers' and burn hospitals' capabilities for treating seriously burned victims. The American Burn Association (ABA) and its members, as experts in burn care, should take the lead in working with local, state, and federal disaster planners. Proposals based on standards adopted by the ABA support classification of facilities (levels I, II, III), identify minimum and maximum bed availability, require minimum training for personnel (e.g., ABLS), and encourage enrollment of all burn centers and burn hospitals as contract hospitals in the National Disaster Medical System. Periodically, the ABA should verify that the burn care facilities identified in the disaster plan meet its standards. Once the burn disaster system is developed, drills should be held locally on a regular basis and nationally on an annual basis.