Search

Introduction: Self-inflicted burns are a rare cause of injury, accounting for only 1.0% of burns in the United States. While rare, the physical and psychosocial ramifications of these injuries are lasting. The goal of this study was to examine the etiologies, risk factors and outcomes of self-inflected burns in an urban setting.Methods: Records of all patients presented to a regional burn center from July 2011 to June 2015 were reviewed. Those who sustained a self-inflected burn were identified and included in this study. Demographic data, psychiatric history, previous self-harm records, insurance status, injury circumstance, burn characteristic [location and total body surface area (TBSA)], need for excision and grafting, graft-take and duration of hospital stay and costs were reviewed. This group was then compared to a cohort of 166 patients with non-intentional burn during the same time frame matched for age and TBSA%.Results: There were 34 patients with a mean (SD) age of 31 (15.2) who sustained a self-inflicted burn during the study period. The mean TBSA% was 2.8 (SD=5.1), with most injuries in the upper and lower extremities. Fifty three percent of the patients presented with altered mental status secondary to either psychiatric illness or intoxication. Twenty-four percent of incidents were claimed as suicide attempts and suicidal ideation was present in 47% of cases. Twenty-six percent of patients with a previous psychiatric diagnosis were not on a psychiatric medication prior to incident. There was record of previous self-harm in 26% of patients. When compared to control group of 166 patient with non-intentional burn, patients with self-inflicted burn had higher rates of substance abuse (35% vs. 13%, p<0.05), longer stay in the hospital (11.3 vs. 5.3 days, p<0.01), longer stay in the intensive care unit (1.8 vs. 0.2 days, p<0.01), and lower rates of insurance (15% vs. 42%, p<0.001). These patients also exhibited a higher need for excision and grafting (41% vs. 20%, p<0.01).Conclusions: Patients with self-inflected burn have a higher rate of previous self-harm behavior, psychiatric comorbidities and substance abuse. These patients are more likely to require surgical excision and grafting and expanded institutional resources compared to those with non-intentional burn with similar degree and size of burn. Increased counseling of at-risk populations may help to decrease this potentially preventable method of injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The importance of adaptable and up-to-date plastic surgery graduate medical education (GME) has taken on new meaning amidst accelerating surgical innovation and increasing calls for competency-based training standards. We aimed to examine the extent to which the procedures plastic surgery residents perform, as represented in case log data, align with 2 core standardized components of plastic surgery GME: ACGME (Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education) minimum procedure count requirements and the PSITE (Plastic Surgery In-Service Training Examination). We also examined their alignment with procedural representation at 2 major plastic surgery meetings., Methods: Nine categories of reconstructive and aesthetic procedures were identified. Three-year averages for the number of procedures completed in each category by residents graduating in 2019-2021 were calculated from ACGME national case log data reports. The ACGME procedure count minimum requirements were also ascertained. The titles and durations of medical programming sessions scheduled for Plastic Surgery The Meeting (PSTM) 2022 and the Plastic Surgery Research Council (PSRC) Annual Meeting 2022 were retrieved from online data. Finally, test items from the 2020 to 2022 administrations of the PSITE were retrieved. Conference sessions and test items were assigned to a single procedure category when possible. Percent differences were calculated for comparison., Results: The distribution of procedures on plastic surgery resident case logs differs from those of the major mechanisms of standardization in plastic surgery GME, in-service examination content more so than ACGME requirements. Meeting content at PSTM and PSRC had the largest percent differences with case log data, with PSTM being skewed toward aesthetics and PSRC toward reconstructive head and neck surgery., Discussion: The criteria and standards by which plastic surgery residents are evaluated and content at national meetings differ from the procedures they actually complete during their training. Although largely reflecting heterogeneity of the specialty, following these comparisons will likely prove useful in the continual evaluation of plastic surgery residency training, especially in the preparation of residents for the variety of training and practice settings they pursue., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Outcomes for patients with burn injuries are optimized by multidisciplinary care in a specialized burn center. Plastic surgeons traditionally have played a significant role in the care of burn patients; however, this may be evolving. We aim to examine the role and employment satisfaction of plastic surgeons in burn surgery., Methods: Members of the American Society of Plastic Surgery with available contact information and US senior plastic surgery residents were asked to complete a survey examining practice profiles and employment satisfaction. Responses were analyzed between groups stating that their practice did and did not involve burn surgery., Results: Of the 573 attending respondents, 135 (23.6%) indicated that part of their practice included burn surgery. Nineteen (41.9%) residents indicated they desired their practice to include burn surgery. About 41.9% of respondents with less than 3 years of experience, 25% with between 3 and 10 years of experience, and 21.7% with greater than 10 years of experience practiced burn surgery. Twenty-one (15.3%) respondents were completely satisfied with their practice, 62 (45.3%) were mostly satisfied, and 36 (26.3%) were satisfied. Fourteen (10.2%) respondents were mostly dissatisfied and 4 (2.9%) were completely dissatisfied (P = 0.0315)., Conclusions: Despite residents' interest and junior plastic surgeons' involvement in burn surgery, the role of burn surgery in responding plastic surgeons' practices diminished over time. Those practicing burn surgery are less likely to be satisfied and more likely to be dissatisfied with their practice. Plastic surgeons should therefore examine their role in burn surgery to optimize their desired involvement and satisfaction within the field.

Background: The current state of employment satisfaction in plastic surgery has not been defined. Similarly, the factors influencing residents as they search for employment and the role of attending surgeons as mentors in this process have not been elicited. The authors aim to elucidate these measures through a survey of attending surgeons and senior residents., Methods: A survey was created assessing employment satisfaction and was distributed to members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons with available contact information. Responses were analyzed, with values of p < 0.05 deemed significant., Results: A total of 616 plastic surgeons and senior plastic surgery residents responded. Compared with attending surgeons in private practice, those in academic practice were more satisfied with their case mix (p = 0.0005; OR, not significant) and less satisfied with their incentive structure (p = 0.0001; OR, 0.3155) and payor mix (p = 0.0005; OR, 0.6156). Employment change occurred in 225 surgeons (39.2 percent) since beginning practice. Surgeons that changed employment ranked base salary (p = 0.0031), earning potential (p = 0.0001), and incentive structure (p = 0.0001) as most important. Those that did not change employment ranked lifestyle (p = 0.0048), location (p = 0.0001), and desire to teach (p = 0.0002) as more important. Residents ranked location (p = 0.0030), desired case mix (p = 0.0131), and desire or lack of desire to teach residents (p = 0.0329) as more important than attending surgeons felt they should be, and guaranteed salary (p = 0.0178) and incentive structure (p = 0.0069) as less important., Conclusions: In an evolving health care environment, plastic surgeons' employment satisfaction is significantly dependent on a myriad of factors. Residents and their attending mentors differ significantly in perceived importance of these factors.

Background: Reduction mammaplasty (RM) is generally thought of as a reconstructive procedure, frequently but variably reimbursed by third-party payers. The purpose of this study was to assess US plastic surgeons' opinions of and interactions with the insurance coverage environment surrounding the reimbursement of RM., Methods: The RM policies of 15 regional and nationwide health insurance carriers were analyzed. A survey regarding RM was distributed to all members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and subsequently analyzed., Results: Most insurance carriers require a minimum resection weight, a minimum age, and a conservative therapy trial. A total of 757 surgeons responded to our survey. Seventy-six percent of the respondents believe that only some RM procedures should be covered by insurance. Sixty-four percent feel that symptoms are the most important factor in the surgeon's determination of medical necessity. Fifty-seven percent state that a breast resection weight of 500 g or greater is required for coverage in their region. Seventy-one percent believe that this weight should be less than 500 g per breast. If the surgeon estimates that he/she will remove 500 g per breast, the minimum weight for coverage, 61% of the surgeons would have patients sign a statement of liability for payment. If the intraoperative resection weight is inadequate, 45.6% would not remove additional tissue, risking nonpayment; 32.7% would complete the procedure and inform the patient that payment is out-of-pocket., Conclusions: Insurance reimbursement for RM varies in approval by carrier. Surgeons believe that signs and symptoms of macromastia determine medical necessity, whereas insurance carriers place a larger emphasis on resection weights.

Introduction: The National Burn Repository (NBR) currently only contains inpatient data from participating United States burn centres. However, the majority of the patients treated in burn centres are managed as outpatients. Unfortunately, this significant demographic is not represented in the NBR annual report. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in aetiology and demographics between inpatient and outpatient burn patients. In addition, the workload demands for data entry of inpatient and outpatient records in the burn registry will be compared., Methods: Outpatient and inpatient burn data at an American Burn Association-Verified Burn Center were prospectively collected during fiscal year 2008. Data collected included age, burn size and aetiology of burn. Aetiology was also stratified by age group. Inpatient data were compared with outpatient data with Fisher's exact test. The amount of time taken to enter inpatients' and outpatients' data parameters in the TRACS v5.0 database was also recorded., Results: Data were collected for 241 inpatients and for 543 outpatients during fiscal year 2008. No significant differences in gender or race were found between the two groups. When comparing demographics, outpatients tended to be younger (26±19 years vs. 32±22 years, p=0.01) with a smaller burn size (2.5±7% vs. 6.8±12%, p<0.001) and a lower frequency of full-thickness burns (17% vs. 41%, p<0.001). Of the patients managed as an outpatient, a total 29.7% were eventually admitted to the hospital. Just over half of those (16.7%) initially managed in the outpatient setting were admitted for a planned surgical procedure. The other 13% were admitted for pain control and wound-care issues. Injury was more likely to be caused by flame in inpatients (p<0.001). Scald injuries were more common in the outpatient setting (34% vs. 27%), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.079). Outpatients were more likely to be injured with a contact burn (p<0.0001). Outpatient injury was more likely to be work-related than inpatient injury (p=0.0497), but less likely to be related to recreational activity (p=0.006) or arson/abuse/assault (p=0.0158). An experienced TRACS v5.0 user required 11±0.6 min to enter an inpatient record and 6±0.6 min to enter an outpatient record in the system (p=0.002)., Conclusions: Inpatient injury is more likely to be caused by flame, whereas outpatient injury is more likely to be caused by scald and contact burns. Work-related burn is more likely to be treated in the outpatient setting. Outpatient burn data also take less time to enter. Since significant differences in aetiology exist, outpatient data should be reported separately from inpatient data in order to understand the full spectrum of burn aetiology. The NBR and other registries should be modified to track outpatient burn data and outcomes., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.)