Subjective scar assessment scales in orthopaedic surgery and determinants of patient satisfaction: A systematic review of the literature

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Diego A Abelleyra Lastoria , Clerin K Benny , Caroline B Hing
{"title":"Subjective scar assessment scales in orthopaedic surgery and determinants of patient satisfaction: A systematic review of the literature","authors":"Diego A Abelleyra Lastoria ,&nbsp;Clerin K Benny ,&nbsp;Caroline B Hing","doi":"10.1016/j.cjtee.2023.02.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Scar assessment tools can be utilized during the post-operative period to monitor scar progress. The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current subjective scar assessment scales utilized in orthopaedic surgery. The secondary aim was to identify determinants of patients’ satisfaction with their scars and evaluate current measurement scales.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses checklist was followed. Electronic databases, currently registered studies, conference proceedings and the reference lists of included studies were searched. There were no constraints based on language or publication status. A narrative synthesis provided a description and evaluation of scales utilized in orthopaedic surgery. Determinants of patient satisfaction were identified along with the scales used to measure satisfaction.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 6059 records were screened in the initial search. Twenty-six articles satisfied the inclusion criteria, assessing 7130 patients. In the literature, six validated subjective scar scales were identified, including the Vancouver scar scale, patient and observer scar assessment scale, Manchester scar scale, Stony Brook scar evaluation scale, visual analogue scale, and Hollander wound evaluation scale. Studies utilizing these scales to evaluate scars following orthopaedic procedures did so successfully. These were total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, and limb reconstruction. The scales demonstrated satisfactory validity. Functional outcomes such as restoration of movement ranked among patients' highest concerns. Scar cosmesis was found to be amongst patients’ lowest priorities.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Subjective scar assessment scales identified in the literature were not designed specifically for orthopaedic surgery. However, these were able to appropriately assess scars in the studies identified in this review. Current evidence suggests the effect of scar cosmesis on patient satisfaction with orthopaedic procedures is limited.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51555,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Journal of Traumatology","volume":"26 5","pages":"Pages 276-283"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/87/8f/main.PMC10533518.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Journal of Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1008127523000044","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Scar assessment tools can be utilized during the post-operative period to monitor scar progress. The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current subjective scar assessment scales utilized in orthopaedic surgery. The secondary aim was to identify determinants of patients’ satisfaction with their scars and evaluate current measurement scales.

Methods

The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses checklist was followed. Electronic databases, currently registered studies, conference proceedings and the reference lists of included studies were searched. There were no constraints based on language or publication status. A narrative synthesis provided a description and evaluation of scales utilized in orthopaedic surgery. Determinants of patient satisfaction were identified along with the scales used to measure satisfaction.

Results

A total of 6059 records were screened in the initial search. Twenty-six articles satisfied the inclusion criteria, assessing 7130 patients. In the literature, six validated subjective scar scales were identified, including the Vancouver scar scale, patient and observer scar assessment scale, Manchester scar scale, Stony Brook scar evaluation scale, visual analogue scale, and Hollander wound evaluation scale. Studies utilizing these scales to evaluate scars following orthopaedic procedures did so successfully. These were total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, and limb reconstruction. The scales demonstrated satisfactory validity. Functional outcomes such as restoration of movement ranked among patients' highest concerns. Scar cosmesis was found to be amongst patients’ lowest priorities.

Conclusions

Subjective scar assessment scales identified in the literature were not designed specifically for orthopaedic surgery. However, these were able to appropriately assess scars in the studies identified in this review. Current evidence suggests the effect of scar cosmesis on patient satisfaction with orthopaedic procedures is limited.

Abstract Image

骨科手术中的主观疤痕评估量表和患者满意度的决定因素:文献的系统回顾。
目的:瘢痕评估工具可用于术后监测瘢痕进展。本系统综述的主要目的是评估目前骨科手术中使用的主观疤痕评估量表。次要目的是确定患者对疤痕满意度的决定因素,并评估当前的测量量表。方法:遵循系统评价和荟萃分析检查表的首选报告项目。检索了电子数据库、目前登记的研究、会议记录和纳入研究的参考文献清单。没有基于语言或出版状态的限制。叙述性综合提供了骨科手术中使用的量表的描述和评估。确定了患者满意度的决定因素以及用于衡量满意度的量表。结果:初步检索共筛选出6059条记录。26篇文章符合纳入标准,评估了7130名患者。在文献中,确定了六种经验证的主观疤痕量表,包括温哥华疤痕量表、患者和观察者疤痕评估量表、曼彻斯特疤痕量表和石溪疤痕评估量量表、视觉模拟量表和霍兰德伤口评估量表。利用这些量表评估整形外科手术后疤痕的研究取得了成功。其中包括全髋关节置换术、全膝关节置换术和肢体重建术。量表显示出令人满意的有效性。恢复运动等功能性结果是患者最关心的问题之一。疤痕美容被发现是患者最不重视的事情之一。结论:文献中确定的主观疤痕评估量表并不是专门为整形外科设计的。然而,这些能够适当评估本综述中确定的研究中的疤痕。目前的证据表明,疤痕美容对整形外科手术患者满意度的影响是有限的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
4.80%
发文量
1707
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Chinese Journal of Traumatology (CJT, ISSN 1008-1275) was launched in 1998 and is a peer-reviewed English journal authorized by Chinese Association of Trauma, Chinese Medical Association. It is multidisciplinary and designed to provide the most current and relevant information for both the clinical and basic research in the field of traumatic medicine. CJT primarily publishes expert forums, original papers, case reports and so on. Topics cover trauma system and management, surgical procedures, acute care, rehabilitation, post-traumatic complications, translational medicine, traffic medicine and other related areas. The journal especially emphasizes clinical application, technique, surgical video, guideline, recommendations for more effective surgical approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信