This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Background/Purpose: With the remarkable progress in the field of burns treatment, the outcome of extensive burns improved significantly. The increased likelihood of survival of a burn victim heightens concerns for potential psychological morbidity. Our aim of this study was to find out the magnitude of depression in burn patients, quality of life (QOL) in cases as compared to control, the correlation between depression and QOL, and the predictive factors for QOL in burns. Materials and Methods: The study sample comprised of 60 patients with burn between ages of 18 years and 65 years seeking consultation for reconstructive surgery. An equal number of healthy controls of similar age and sex were also enrolled to make a comparison group. Participants were assessed for the presence of depression and QOL by using patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9) and World Health Organization quality of life-BREF scale, respectively. Result: Depression was found statistically significant in burn patients as compared to control. 28.33%-mild, 25%-moderate, 23.33%-severe, and 15%-moderately severe as compared to control, where 86.67% of study sample had no features of depression (P < 0.001). The overall QOL was found significantly lower (32.75 ± 10.33 vs. 69.44 ± 10.87) (P < 0.001). A significant inverse fair correlation existed between the PHQ-9 and QOL. Lower QOL in burn patients positively associated with multiple factors like female patients, the involvement of exposed part, facial burn, etc. Conclusion: The high prevalence of clinically significant depression and lower QOL of in burn reconstruction patients and their relationship with body image suggest the importance of the routine psychological screening and the treatment of patients seeking reconstruction surgeries.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rathore et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: