Summary: Background: Reducing blood loss during excisional surgery in burn patients remains a challenge. Tranexamic acid during surgery can potentially reduce blood loss. The use of tranexamic acid during excisional surgery in burn patients has recently been described in a review and meta-analysis. However, quality assessment on studies included was not performed and this review did not apply independent reviewers. Quality assessment of studies investigating the effectiveness of tranexamic acid in burn patients is crucial before concusions can be drawn. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature investigating the effectiveness of tranexamic acid in burn patients undergoing surgery. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was conducted. The study was pre-registered in PROSPERO database (CRD42023396183). Results: Five studies including two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 303 patients were included. Risk of bias of the included studies was moderate to high. Individual results of the studies were heterogeneous. In three studies of moderate quality the administration of tranexamic acid resulted in a reduction of blood loss per unit excised area, accounting as moderate level of evidence. In two low-quality studies and one moderate quality study the administration of tranexamic acid resulted in a reduction of transfused packed Red Blood Cells (pRBC’s), accounting for moderate level of evidence. Postoperative haemoglobin levels were higher after tranexamic acid administration in one study, accounting for insufficient evidence. Meta-analysis pooling overall blood loss from two separate RCTs failed to detect a statistically significant reduction. Substantial heterogeneity was observed. Conclusions: Moderate level of evidence indicates that tranexamic acid reduces blood loss per unit of excised area and transfusion of packed Red Blood Cells. Results indicate that tranexamic acid can be beneficial in burn patients undergoing surgery. More high-quality research is needed to confirm these results. Future studies should focus on the dosing of tranexamic acid, the administration approaches, and even consider combining these approaches. Trial Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42023396183

Background: The transformation in global demography and the shortage of health care workers require innovation and efficiency in the field of health care. Digital technology can help improve the efficiency of health care. The Mercury Advance SMARTcare solution is an example of digital technology. The system is connected to a hybrid mattress and is able to detect patient movement, based on which the air pump either starts automatically or sends a notification to the app. Barriers to the adoption of the system are unknown, and it is unclear if the solution will be able to support health care workers in their work. Objective: This study aims to gain insight into health care workers’ expectations of factors that could either hamper or support the adoption of the Mercury Advance SMARTcare unit connected to a Mercury Advance mattress to help prevent patients from developing pressure injuries in hospitals and long-term care facilities. Methods: We conducted a generic qualitative study from February to December 2022. Interviews were conducted, and a focus group was established using an interview guide of health care workers from both the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Thematic analysis was performed by 2 independent researchers. Results: A total of 14 participants took part in the study: 6 (43%) participants joined the focus group, and 8 (57%) participants took part in the individual interviews. We identified 13 factors based on four themes: (1) factors specifically related to SMARTresponse, (2) vision on innovation, (3) match with health care activities, and (4) materials and resources involved. Signaling function, SMARTresponse as prevention, patient category, representatives, and implementation strategy were identified as facilitators. Perception of patient repositioning, accessibility to pressure injury aids, and connectivity were identified as barriers. Conclusions: Several conditions must be met to enhance the adoption of the Mercury Advance SMARTcare solution, including the engagement of representatives during training and a reliable wireless network. The identified factors can be used to facilitate the implementation process.

Background: Critical care for patients with severe burn injuries is challenging, particularly in the first 24–48 h. Multiple guidelines exist but their recommendations vary in content and in the level of detail. Methods: This narrative review analyzed recent (last 10 years) adult burn guidelines in English, Dutch and German, sourced from PubMed, Medline and official burn society publications. The review focused on airway management, mechanical ventilation, fluid resuscitation, pain management and procedural sedation. Results: All guidelines emphasize early airway assessment and timely intubation in patients at risk for loss of airway patency; however, a strategy for analyzing patients at risk is lacking. Lung-protective ventilation strategy is generally recommended. Fluid resuscitation is the cornerstone during the first phase, though recommendations for thresholds, volume and adjuncts differ. (Chronic) pain management should be multimodal, combining pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approaches, but specifics on choice of modality are limited, also, there is no uniform strategy for procedural sedation management. Conclusion: Current guidelines offer broadly consistent recommendations for initial burn care but differ in specifics, reflecting evidence gaps. Future guidelines should address advances in airway management, fluid resuscitation endpoints, volume and adjuncts, and give a more detailed (chronic) pain strategy to improve standardization and outcomes.

Objective: This scoping review systematically examines the use of intraoperative cell salvage in bacterially contaminated surgical settings, examining contamination levels, decontamination strategies, and clinical outcomes following the reinfusion of contaminated salvaged blood. Methods: Following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews, comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Eligible studies included primary empirical research reporting bacterial contamination of salvaged blood confirmed by culture, as well as studies reporting on decontamination strategies or clinical outcomes following reinfusion, across any surgical setting. Data was extracted and synthesized descriptively. Key findings were summarized in structured tables. Results: Thirty-nine studies, involving 1654 patient, met the inclusion criteria. Bacterial contamination was consistently reported, with positive culture rates varying widely. Methodological quality was assessed for all studies, except the ex-vivo studies. Decontamination strategies, including leukocyte depletion filtration (10 studies) and antibiotic additives (4 studies), reduced contamination, though effectiveness varied. Among 26 studies, involving 1203 patients, who received reinfused salvaged blood, postoperative infections were reported in 15 studies. A total of 55 cases of postoperative bacteraemia were identified. Only five studies described a plausible microbiological link between the reinfused blood and subsequent infection, involving nine patients in whom the isolated pathogen matched the organism cultured from the salvaged blood. Conclusion: Bacterial contamination of salvaged blood occurred frequently, even in procedures not typically classified as contaminated. Decontamination strategies demonstrated variable effectiveness in reducing bacterial contamination. Despite contamination, a potential microbiological link between reinfused salvaged blood and infection was described in only nine patients across five studies. However, substantial heterogeneity in methodologies and a small sample size of most studies makes it difficult to draw definite conclusions about safety. Therefore, we would advise to use cell salvage in known bacterial contaminated areas on a case by case basis, after careful evaluation of the pros and cons, until future research defined safe contamination thresholds, evaluated the effectiveness of decontamination techniques, and assessed clinical outcomes in standardized and controlled settings.

BACKGROUND The transformation in global demography and the shortage of health care workers require innovation and efficiency in the field of health care. Digital technology can help improve the efficiency of health care. The Mercury Advance SMARTcare solution is an example of digital technology. The system is connected to a hybrid mattress and is able to detect patient movement, based on which the air pump either starts automatically or sends a notification to the app. Barriers to the adoption of the system are unknown, and it is unclear if the solution will be able to support health care workers in their work. OBJECTIVE This study aims to gain insight into health care workers’ expectations of factors that could either hamper or support the adoption of the Mercury Advance SMARTcare unit connected to a Mercury Advance mattress to help prevent patients from developing pressure injuries in hospitals and long-term care facilities. METHODS We conducted a generic qualitative study from February to December 2022. Interviews were conducted, and a focus group was established using an interview guide of health care workers from both the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Thematic analysis was performed by 2 independent researchers. RESULTS A total of 14 participants took part in the study: 6 (43%) participants joined the focus group, and 8 (57%) participants took part in the individual interviews. We identified 13 factors based on four themes: (1) factors specifically related to SMARTresponse, (2) vision on innovation, (3) match with health care activities, and (4) materials and resources involved. Signaling function, SMARTresponse as prevention, patient category, representatives, and implementation strategy were identified as facilitators. Perception of patient repositioning, accessibility to pressure injury aids, and connectivity were identified as barriers. CONCLUSIONS Several conditions must be met to enhance the adoption of the Mercury Advance SMARTcare solution, including the engagement of representatives during training and a reliable wireless network. The identified factors can be used to facilitate the implementation process.