A cross-sectional investigation and analysis of early treatment of partial-thickness burn wounds by professional burn medical staff in China.
10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20220317-00065
- Author:
Jie HUANG
1
;
Shu Yuan LI
2
;
Xue Xin WANG
1
;
Lin Hui LI
1
;
Xiao Fei YE
3
;
Shi Zhao JI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Burn Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, Burn Institute of PLA, Shanghai 200433, China.
2. Department of General Surgery, Naval 929th Hospital, Shanghai 200433, China.
3. Department of Health Statistics, Naval Medical University, Shanghai 200433, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Adult;
Blister;
Burns/drug therapy*;
Cicatrix/pathology*;
Cross-Sectional Studies;
Female;
Humans;
Hyperplasia;
Male;
Medical Staff;
Middle Aged;
Occupations;
Pain;
Soft Tissue Injuries;
Wound Infection
- From:
Chinese Journal of Burns
2022;38(6):538-548
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To assess the current situation of early treatment of partial-thickness burn wounds by professional burn medical staff in China, and to further promote the standardized early clinical treatment of partial-thickness burn wounds. Methods: A cross-sectional investigation was conducted. From November 2020 to February 2021, the self-designed questionnaire for the early treatment of partial-thickness burn wounds was published through the "questionnaire star" website and shared through WeChat to conduct a convenient sampling survey of domestic medical staff engaged in burn specialty who met the inclusion criteria. The number, region, and grade of the affiliated hospital, the age, gender, occupation, and seniority of the respondents were recorded. The respondents were divided into physician group and nurse group, senior group and junior group, eastern region group and non-eastern region group, primary and secondary hospital group and tertiary hospital group. Then the seniority, grade of the affiliated hospital, region of the affiliated hospital of the respondents in physician group and nurse group, conventional treatment of partial-thickness burn blisters, reasons for retaining vesicular skin, reasons for removing vesicular skin, and the conventional selection and optimal solution recommendation of topical drugs or dressings for partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage of respondents in each of all the groups were recorded. Data were statistically analyzed with chi-square test. Results: The survey covered 31 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions in China (except for Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan regions). A total of 979 questionnaires were recovered, which were all valid. The 979 respondents came from 449 hospitals across the country, including 203 hospitals in the eastern region, 116 hospitals in the western region, 99 hospitals in the central region, and 31 hospitals in the northeast region, 348 tertiary hospitals, 79 secondary hospitals, and 22 primary hospitals. The age of the respondents was (39±10) years. There were 543 males and 436 females, 656 physicians and 323 nurses, 473 juniors and 506 seniors, 460 in the eastern regions and 519 in the non-eastern regions, 818 in tertiary hospitals and 161 in primary and secondary hospitals. There were statistically significant differences in the composition of different seniority in the respondents between physician group and nurse group (χ2=44.32, P<0.01), while there were no statistically significant differences in grade or region of the affiliated hospital of the respondents between physician group and nurse group (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the conventional treatment of partial-thickness burn blisters among respondents between different occupational groups, seniority groups, and region of the affiliated hospital groups (P>0.05).The respondents in different grade of the affiliated hospital groups differed significantly in the conventional treatment of partial-thickness burn blisters (χ2=6.24, P<0.05). Compared with respondents in nurse group, larger percentage of respondents in physician group chose to retain vesicular skin for protecting the wounds and providing a moist environment, and alleviating the pain of dressing change (with χ2 values of 21.22 and 19.96, respectively, P values below 0.01), and smaller percentage of respondents in physician group chose to retain vesicular skin for prevention of wound infection (χ2=23.55, P<0.01). The reasons for retaining vesicular skin of respondents between physician group and nurse group were similar in accelerating wound healing, alleviating pigmentation and scar hyperplasia post wound healing (P>0.05). Compared with respondents in junior group, larger percentage of respondents in senior group chose to retain vesicular skin for protecting the wounds and providing a moist environment and alleviating the pain of dressing change (with χ2 values of 10.36 and 4.60, respectively, P<0.05 or P<0.01), and smaller percentage of respondents in senior group chose to retain vesicular skin for prevention of wound infection (χ2=8.20, P<0.01). The reasons for retaining vesicular skin of respondents in senior group and junior group were similar in accelerating wound healing, alleviating pigmentation and scar hyperplasia post wound healing (P>0.05). The 5 reasons for the respondents between eastern region group and non-eastern region group, primary and secondary hospital group and tertiary hospital group chose to retain vesicular skin were all similar (P>0.05). Compared with those in physician group, significantly higher percentage of respondents in nurse group were in favor of the following 6 reasons for removing the vesicular skin, including convenience for using more ideal dressings to protect the wounds, prevention of wound infection, facilitating the effect of topical drugs on the wounds, the likely rupture of blisters and wound contamination, accelerating wound healing, and alleviating pigmentation and scar hyperplasia post wound healing (with χ2 values of 4.35, 25.59, 11.83, 16.76, 46.31, and 17.54, respectively, P<0.05 or P<0.01). Compared with respondents in senior group, larger percentage of respondents in junior group chose to remove vesicular skin for the reasons such as the likely blister rupture and wound contamination, preventing wound infection, accelerating wound healing, and alleviating pigmentation and scar hyperplasia post wound healing (with χ2 values of 17.25, 18.63, 14.83, and 10.23, respectively, P values below 0.01). Compared with respondents in non-eastern region group, larger percentage of respondents in eastern region group chose to remove vesicular skin for preventing wound infection and the likely rupture of blisters and wound contamination (with χ2 values of 9.30 and 8.65, respectively, P values below 0.01). The 6 reasons for the respondents between tertiary hospital group and primary and secondary hospital group choose to remove vesicular skin were similar (P>0.05). Compared with respondents in physician group, larger percentage of respondents in nurse group chose to use moisturizing materials for partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage (χ2=6.18, P<0.05), and smaller percentage of respondents in nurse group chose other topical drugs or dressings (χ2=5.20, P<0.05). Compared with respondents in junior group, larger percentage of respondents in senior group chose to use moisturizing materials and other topical drugs or dressings for partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage (with χ2 values of 4.97 and 21.80, respectively, P<0.05 or P<0.01). Compared with respondents in non-eastern region group, larger percentage of respondents in eastern region group chose to use topical antimicrobial drugs for partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage (χ2=4.09, P<0.05), and smaller percentage of respondents in eastern region group chose to use other topical drugs or dressings for the partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage (χ2=5.63, P<0.05). Compared with respondents in primary and secondary hospital group, larger percentage of respondents in tertiary hospital group chose to use biological dressings for partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage (χ2=9.38, P<0.01). The optimal solution recommendation of topical drugs or dressings for partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage varied significantly among the respondents between different occupational groups and seniority groups (with χ2 values of 39.58 and 19.93, respectively, P values below 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences between eastern and non-eastern region groups, tertiary hospital group and primary and secondary hospital groups in optimal solution recommendation of topical drugs or dressings for partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage (P>0.05). Conclusions: The conventional treatment measures of partial-thickness burn blisters and reasons for preserving blister skin by professional burn medical staff in China are relatively consistent, but there are great differences in the selection of reasons for removing blister skin, the conventional selection and optimal solution recommendation of topical drugs or dressings for partial-thickness burn wounds in the early stage. Therefore, it is urgent to establish a clinical treatment standard for partial-thickness burn wounds.
