Determining the Independent Risk Factors for Worse SCAR-Q Scores and Future Scar Revision Surgery.

Journal Article (Journal Article;Multicenter Study)

BACKGROUND: Scar revisions have been increasing in number. Patient-reported outcome measures are one tool to aid scar modulation decision-making. The aims of this study were to determine patient, scar, and clinical risk factors for (1) low SCAR-Q Appearance, Symptom, and Psychosocial Impact scores and how this differs for children; and (2) the potential need for future scar revision surgery to better identify such patients in a clinical setting. METHODS: A multicenter international cross-sectional cohort study based on survey data of participants with traumatic, surgical, and burn scars attending plastic, hand, and burn clinics in four countries was conducted following the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist. Univariate analysis to identify risk factors and multivariable logistic analysis to select risk factors were completed. Collinearity for nonindependent factors and C statistic for model discrimination were also calculated. RESULTS: Seven hundred thirty-one participants completed the study booklet, and 546 participants (74.7 percent) had full data. Independent risk factors were determined to be a bothersome scar and perception of scarring badly for all three scales. Risk factors for self-reporting the need for future surgery included a health condition, scarring badly, scar diagnosis, prior scar revision, and low Psychosocial Impact scores. We did not identify evidence of multicollinearity. C statistics were high (0.81 to 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first multicenter international study to examine independent risk factors for low patient-reported outcome measure scores and the potential need for future scar revision surgery. Patients that perceive themselves as scarring badly and having a bothersome scar were at a higher risk of scar appearance concern, an increased symptom burden, and poorer psychosocial impact scores. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Ziolkowski, NI; Behman, R; Klassen, AF; Fish, JS; Mundy, LR; She, RW; Forrest, CR; Hollenbeck, S; Arriagada, C; Greenhalgh, D; Pusic, AL

Published Date

  • July 1, 2021

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 148 / 1

Start / End Page

  • 203 - 212

PubMed ID

  • 34076625

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1529-4242

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008095


  • eng

Conference Location

  • United States