Contact burns: the influence of agents and mechanisms of injury on anatomical burn locations in children <5 years old and associations with child protection referrals.
bit.ly shows its articles on its own site.
Read the article on bit.ly ↗Article · Feb 2020 · 1 min read
In brief
In brief
This prospective study of 816 accidental contact burns in children under 5 identifies characteristic patterns linking burn location to causative agent and mechanism, with hands most commonly affected from reaching while stationary. The research provides evidence-based anatomical patterns to help clinicians distinguish accidental burns from those requiring child protection assessment.
Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.
OBJECTIVE: To identify how causative agents and mechanisms of injury influence the location of an accidental contact burn in children and whether these factors differ in cases referred for child protection (CP) assessment.
DESIGN: Prospective multicentre cross-sectional study.
SETTING: 20 hospital sites across England and Wales, including: emergency departments, minor injury units and regional burn units.
PATIENTS: Children less than 5 years old who attended hospital for a contact burn (August 2015 to September 2018).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Location of burns with respect to agent and mechanism for accidental contact burns. Secondary outcome: mechanism, agent and location of burns referred for CP assessment.
RESULTS: 816 accidental burns and 92 referrals for CP assessment. The most common for accidental burns: mechanism was reaching while stationary (68%, 553/816), agent was oven (24.5%, 200/816) and site was the hand (69.2%, 565/816). Burns to head and trunk were rare at 3.7% (30/816). The data enabled a tabulation of the locations of burns as predicted by agent and mechanism of injury. The location of the burn was most strongly influenced by mechanism.Burns from irons (p