These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Patient reported facial scar assessment: directions for the professional. Author: Hoogewerf CJ, van Baar ME, Middelkoop E, van Loey NE. Journal: Burns; 2014 Mar; 40(2):347-53. PubMed ID: 24138808. Abstract: BACKGROUND: The face is central to our identity and provides our most expressive means of communication. Currently, the role of facial scarring in relation to self-esteem is unclear and the value of self-reported scar assessment is insufficiently understood. The aim of this study was twofold: (1) to assess the extent of agreement between patients' ratings and observers' ratings of facial scar characteristics; and (2) to examine if patients' and observers' scar characteristics ratings, or the differences, are associated with the patients' self-esteem. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted including patients with facial burns. Patients completed the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale 3 months post-burn. RESULTS: Ninety-four subjects were included, 76 (81%) men and mean percentage TBSA burned was 12.4 (SD 10.4; range 1-50). Subject's and observer's assessment were significantly positively correlated and were identical in 53% of the cases. Subjects' assessments and discrepancy scores on the scar characteristic surface roughness were associated with self-esteem in multiple regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the patients scored the quality of facial scars in a similar way as the professionals. Furthermore, facial scarring appeared only moderately associated with self-esteem. However, our study suggests that using both patients' and professionals' scar assessments provides more useful information regarding the patients' well-being relative to focussing on the separate assessments only. In particular a discrepancy between the patients' and professionals' view on surface roughness might be an early indication of psychological difficulties and a call for further clinical attention.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]