Values of patients and caregivers for donor site scars: An inter-observer analysis between patients and caregivers and prediction of cosmetic satisfaction

Brölmann, Fleur E.; Kar, Annekatrien L. van de; Niessen, Frank B.; Lindeboom, Robert; Ubbink, Dirk T.; Vermeulen, Hester

doi:10.1016/j.burns.2012.04.011

Cited by 18 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The limited agreement on specific items that we found between patients and observers is consistent with studies that reported differences in scar appreciation between patients and observers on linear scars. 5,[22][23][24] Eskes et al only found a "moderate" agreement on the overall opinion item of the POSAS on donor-site scars in a general trauma population and also a F I G U R E Bland and Altman plots demonstrating the agreement of Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) overall opinion scores between patients and caregivers at 3 (left) and 12 (right) months post-surgery. Each dot in the figure represents a donor-site scar judged by the patient and observers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, they did not study the magnitude or direction of the differences between patients' and observers'. 5 Hoogewerf et al studied the magnitude and direction of differences in assessment of facial burn scars for patients and observers in a Dutch burn population. 4 They found that 53%…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…healing. 5 They found discrepancies between patients' and observers' opinions on different characteristics of donor-site scars. 5 However, they included mainly male patients who underwent surgery in a nonacute setting and only included adults with a mean age of 59.6 years.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 They found discrepancies between patients' and observers' opinions on different characteristics of donor-site scars. 5 However, they included mainly male patients who underwent surgery in a nonacute setting and only included adults with a mean age of 59.6 years. 6 Furthermore, scars were assessed at 12 weeks post-surgery, which limits the insight into the final situation of the scar as the active transformation processes and maturation of scars takes at least 1 year.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Course of scar quality of donor sites following split skin graft harvesting: Comparison between patients and observers

Legemate

Ooms

Trommel

et al. 2020

Wound Repair Regeneration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There exists little to no data on the development of donor‐site scars that remain after split skin graft harvesting. The objectives of this study were to (a) examine changes in characteristics of donor‐site scar quality over time and (b) assess the agreement between patient‐reported and observer‐reported donor‐site scar quality in a burn population. A prospective cohort study was conducted including patients who underwent split skin grafting for their burn injury. Patients and observers completed the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) for the first harvested donor site at 3 and 12 months post‐surgery. This study included 80 patients with a median age of 34 years. At 3 months post‐surgery, the patients scored the POSAS items itch and color as most deviant from normal skin, both improved between 3 and 12 months (3.1 vs 1.5 and 5.0 vs 3.5, respectively [P < .001]). Other scar characteristics did not show significant change over time. The patients' overall opinion score improved from 3.9 to 3.2 (P < .001). Observers rated the items vascularization and pigmentation most severe, only vascularization improved significantly between both time points. Their overall opinion score decreased from 2.7 to 2.3 (P < .001). The inter‐observer agreement between patients and observers was considered poor (ICC < 0.4) at both time points. Results of current study indicate that observers underestimate the impact of donor‐site scars. This has to be kept in mind while guiding therapy and expectations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II, prospective cohort study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Course of scar quality of donor sites following split skin graft harvesting: Comparison between patients and observers

Legemate

Ooms

Trommel

et al. 2020

Wound Repair Regeneration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Eskes et al (20) found that although POSAS is reliable measurement tool, healthcare professionals, caregivers and patients can evaluate scar differently (ICC =0.44, confidence intervals =0.27-0.58).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version of Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in Patients with Burns

Aydoğan¹,

Kabuk²,

Kazan³

2017

tdd

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ÖzAmaç: Hasta ve Gözlemci Skar Değerlendirme Ölçeği'nin (HGSDÖ) Türkçe formunun yanık hastalarında geçerlik ve güvenirliğini değerlendirmek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Yöntemler: Metodolojik tipte bir çalışmadır. Çalışmanın verileri HGSDÖ, anket formu ve pleksiglas kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Hasta Skar Değerlendirme Ölçeği (HSDÖ) hastalar tarafından (n=53), Gözlemci Skar Değerlendirme Ölçeği (GSDÖ) birbirinden bağımsız iki gözlemci tarafından doldurulmuştur. İki hafta sonra ölçekler 25 hastaya tekrar uygulanmıştır. Veriler Kruskal-Wallis ve Mann-Whitney U testi ile analiz edilmiştir. Ölçeğin kapsam geçerliğinde Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin ve Barlett testi, yapı geçerliğinde Açıklayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA), güvenirliğin değerlendirilmesinde iç tutarlılık, Cronbach's alpha ve intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) ile bakılmıştır. HGSDÖ'de yer alan 7. madde, orijinal ölçekte olduğu gibi, ölçeğin puanı dışında tutularak değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: AFA'ya göre ölçeğin faktör yüklerinin uygun aralıkta, DFA'ya göre orijinal ölçeğin 6 madde tek faktörlü yapısının geçerli ve uyum indekslerinin yüksek, ölçeğin toplam puanı ile 7. madde arasında ICC'nin doğru orantılı, iç tutarlılığın yüksek derecede güvenilir (HSDÖ α=0,992, GSDÖ α=0,993), gözlemciler arasında tutarlılığın yüksek (α=0,952, r=0,909) olduğu saptanmıştır. Hastaların yanıklarının derecesi arttığında, GSDÖ puanının anlamlı derecede arttığı belirlenmiştir (p<0,05). Sonuç: HGSDÖ'nün Türk toplumu için yanık hastalarında geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçek olduğu belirlenmiştir. Anahtar kelimeler: Yanık, skar, ölçek, güvenirlik ve geçerlik, hasta, gözlemci Objective: To evaluation reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) in patients with burns. Methods: This is a methodologically study. Data were collected using POSAS, survey form and plexiglas. Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS) was completed by patients (n=53) and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS) was completed by two observers separately. The test-retest was measured applying the scales in 25 patients after two weeks. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test. Content validity was determined using Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin, Barlett's test and structure validity was performed by explanatory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA); reliability was evaluated using internal consistency, Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: Factor weights were in appropriate range according to EFA, 6 items single factor structure of the original scale was valid and had high consistency index according to CFA, ICC between the 7 th item and the total points was proportional, inner consistency was highly reliable (PSAS α=0.992, OSAS α=0.993), consistency between the observers was high (α=0.952, r=0.909). It was determined OSAS scores increased as the burn degree increased (p<0.05). Conclusion: POSAS was determined to be a valid and reliable scale in patients with burns in t...

show abstract

Transoral and submental endoscopic thyroidectomy (TOaST) for early stage papillary thyroid carcinoma: a real-world data retrospective cohort study

Ma¹,

Shi²,

Zhang³

et al. 2023

Surg Endosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Values of patients and caregivers for donor site scars: An inter-observer analysis between patients and caregivers and prediction of cosmetic satisfaction

Cited by 18 publications

References 21 publications

Course of scar quality of donor sites following split skin graft harvesting: Comparison between patients and observers

Course of scar quality of donor sites following split skin graft harvesting: Comparison between patients and observers

Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version of Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in Patients with Burns

Transoral and submental endoscopic thyroidectomy (TOaST) for early stage papillary thyroid carcinoma: a real-world data retrospective cohort study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About