Burn survivors’ perception of recovery after injury: A Northwest Regional Burn Model System investigation

Sibbett, Stephen; Carrougher, Gretchen J.; Pham, Tam N.; Mandell, Samuel P.; Arbabi, Saman; Stewart, Barclay T; Gibran, Nicole S.

doi:10.1016/j.burns.2020.09.008

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, reduced levels of health-related quality of life (HRQL) [1] are common within the first year post-burn [2]. A growing number of studies have assessed pre-burn HRQL [3,4], which may serve as a reliable benchmark for patient recovery of HRQL and may aid prognosis and treatment choices [5]. Since sustaining burns is an unexpected event, pre-burn functioning is preferably assessed retrospectively and within the first weeks after the injury [6,7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pre-Burn Health-Related Quality of Life: Patient and Partner Perspectives

Dam

Hofland

Jong³

et al. 2022

EBJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A proxy-assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQL) may be an alternative for burn patients who are medically unable to self-report shortly after being admitted to the hospital. This study examined the patient–partner agreement on the recalled pre-injury HRQL of burn patients. In a multi-centre study of 117 patient–partner pairs, the recalled pre-burn HRQL was assessed with the EQ-5D-3L + Cognition during the acute phase following the burns. Agreement was evaluated with Kappa and ICC statistics. Burn severity and PTSD symptoms were assessed as potential predictors of disagreement. The results showed that pre-burn EQ-Index scores were similar to population norms, whereas the EQ Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS) scores of patients were significantly higher. Agreement varied across EQ-5D domains and, after adjusting for prevalence, was substantial to almost perfect. Average agreement on the EQ-Index and EQ-VAS was, respectively, substantial and moderate, but differences between partners were larger at lower levels of HRQL, and specifically in the pain/discomfort domain. Patient–partner differences could not be explained by the patient’s age or gender, number of surgeries, partner’s presence at the burn event, or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms of either the patient or partner. In conclusion, patient–partner agreement is substantial and partner–proxy reports of pre-burn EQ-5D domains and EQ-Index scores may be used to complement or serve as a substitute for the patient’s assessment. Given the moderate agreement on the EQ-VAS, it may be less suited for proxy assessment.

show abstract