The Impact of COVID-19 on Adult Burn Management in the United Kingdom: A Regional Center Experience

Abstract

In this study, the authors aim to quantify the impact of COVID-19 on burns provision at an adult regional burn centre. Two cohorts of patients were identified for comparison: one during the beginning of the COVID-19 lockdown in April 2020 and a comparator cohort in April 2019. There was a 30% decrease in the incidence of adult burns in 2020. The mean total body surface area (TBSA) was 1.8% and 4.3% in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Scald injuries were the commonest mechanism of burns in both cohorts. Depth of burns were deeper in 2019, with 17.6% of patients presenting with deep burns, compared with 9.6% in 2020. 8% of patients in 2019 required theatre compared with zero patients in 2020. A similar percentage of patients were admitted in both cohorts. In 2019, admitted patients had an average inpatient stay of 0.57 days per TBSA. In 2020, the average stay per TBSA in all patients was 0.6 days and 1.5 days in survivors. In the lockdown period, 54% of patients were followed up by telemedicine. This difficult period has taught us how important a functioning healthcare system is and how we can be better prepared in the future.

Characteristics of burn injury during COVID-19 pandemic in Tokyo: A descriptive study

“…This study showed a decreased number of burn injury patients during the pandemic; this was similar to reports from other more economically developed countries, such as Canada, the US, and the UK [10] , [12] , [17] , [18] . In Toronto, Canada, there was a 33% decrease in burn injury admissions at a burn center during a 5-month period within the pandemic [10] .…”

“…Conversely, less patients during the pandemic suffered from intended burns (9 [4.4%] vs 584 [8.5%]), assault injuries (14 [6.9%] vs 718 [10.5%]), head and/or neck injuries (37 [18.2%] vs 1685 [24.6%]), and associated inhalation injuries (74 [36.5%] vs 2877 [42.0%]). Regarding the severity and outcomes of burn injuries, a slightly higher %TBSA of partial-thickness burns (4 [1] , [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , [10] vs 3 [0–10] %TBSA), shorter LOS (3 [1] , [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , [10] , [11] , [12] , [13] vs 5 [1] , [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , [10] , [11] , [12] , [13] , [14] , [15] , [16] , [17] , [18] days), and lower in-hospital mortality (18 [8.9%] vs 817 [11.9%]) were seen in patients during pandemic compared to before the pandemic.…”

Sustained high demand for intensive care unit resources for the treatment of burn patients during the COVID-19 pandemic in Northern Germany: A single-centre cross-sectional study

“…Similar studies were published by other burn centres from economically developed countries, such as the UK, the US, Canada, and Japan [ 5 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. D'Asta et al reported a decrease in adult burn patients by 60% during the lockdown, although the number of paediatric burn cases increased by 8% at the same time [11] .…”

“…A slight decrease of admitted burn patients by 5.8% was reported by Codner et al [12] . Further, a regional burn centre located in the UK reported a 30% decrease in adult burns during the COVID-19 pandemic [13] . On the other hand, a study from a US centre reported more frequent paediatric burns during the COVID-19 pandemic [14] .…”

Challenges in Burn Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic—A Scoping Review

“…Although some burn units have reported their measures [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ], there are no data on the impact of these with regard to treatment outcomes. Most of the data published in the literature thus far refer to epidemiological and demographic data in addition to injury and treatment characteristics of burn patients [ 8 , 15 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 ].…”