Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Prevalence and risk factors for acute stress disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder after burn injury.

MedStar author(s):

Clemente, Lisa E

Johnson, Laura

Citation: American Journal of Surgery. 223(1):151-156, 2022 Jan.PMID: 34330520Institution: MedStar Health Research Institute | MedStar Washington Hospital CenterDepartment: Firefighters' Burn and Surgical Research Laboratory | MedStar General Surgery Residency | Surgery/Burn ServicesForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: *Burns/co [Complications] | *Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/ep [Epidemiology] | *Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Acute/ep [Epidemiology] | Adult | Burn Units/sn [Statistics & Numerical Data] | Burns/px [Psychology] | Cross-Sectional Studies | Female | Humans | Length of Stay/sn [Statistics & Numerical Data] | Male | Middle Aged | Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/sn [Statistics & Numerical Data] | Patient Admission/sn [Statistics & Numerical Data] | Prevalence | Risk Factors | Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/di [Diagnosis] | Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/px [Psychology] | Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Acute/di [Diagnosis] | Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Acute/px [Psychology]Year: 2022 ISSN:

0002-9610

Name of journal: American journal of surgeryAbstract: BACKGROUND: Psychological consequences of burn injury can be profound. Acute stress disorder (ASD) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are known sequelae, but routine identification is challenging. This study aims to identify patient characteristics associated with outpatient positive screens.CONCLUSIONS: Numerous factors distinguish burn injury from other traumatic mechanisms and contribute to disproportionate rates of traumatic stress disorders. Optimization of burn-oriented ASD and PTSD screening protocols can enable earlier intervention. Copyright (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.METHODS: The Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder questionnaire (PC-PTSD-4) was administered at initial outpatient Burn Center visits between 5/2018-12/2018. Demographics, injury mechanism, and total body surface area (TBSA) were recorded. Those with >=3 affirmative answers were considered positive. Patients with positive and negative screens were compared.RESULTS: Of 307 surveys collected, 292 (median TBSA 1.5 %, IQR 0.5-4.0 %) remained for analysis after exclusions. Of those, 24.0 % screened positive. Positive screens were associated with presence of a deep component of the injury, injury mechanism, upper extremity involvement, ICU admission, and prolonged hospital length of stay.All authors: Clemente LE, Johnson LS, Nosanov LB, Parrish KR, Prindeze NJ, Schneider DM, Shupp JW, Travis TEOriginally published: American Journal of Surgery. 2021 Jul 26Fiscal year: FY2022Fiscal year of original publication: FY2022Digital Object Identifier:

https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.07.035

Date added to catalog: 2021-11-01

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes ( 5 )

Holdings
Item type	Current library	Collection	Call number	Status	Date due	Barcode
Journal Article	MedStar Authors Catalog	Article	34330520	Available		34330520

BACKGROUND: Psychological consequences of burn injury can be profound. Acute stress disorder (ASD) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are known sequelae, but routine identification is challenging. This study aims to identify patient characteristics associated with outpatient positive screens.

CONCLUSIONS: Numerous factors distinguish burn injury from other traumatic mechanisms and contribute to disproportionate rates of traumatic stress disorders. Optimization of burn-oriented ASD and PTSD screening protocols can enable earlier intervention. Copyright (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

METHODS: The Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder questionnaire (PC-PTSD-4) was administered at initial outpatient Burn Center visits between 5/2018-12/2018. Demographics, injury mechanism, and total body surface area (TBSA) were recorded. Those with >=3 affirmative answers were considered positive. Patients with positive and negative screens were compared.

RESULTS: Of 307 surveys collected, 292 (median TBSA 1.5 %, IQR 0.5-4.0 %) remained for analysis after exclusions. Of those, 24.0 % screened positive. Positive screens were associated with presence of a deep component of the injury, injury mechanism, upper extremity involvement, ICU admission, and prolonged hospital length of stay.

English