Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile for children aged less than 8 years cross-cultural adaptation.
Francieli Ferreira de Andrade Batista, Rosângela Aparecida Pimenta, Elisângela Flauzino Zampar and 3 others
PMID 40802293WHAT IT FOUND
The Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile translated into Brazilian Portuguese is reliable for assessing quality of life in children under 8 with burn scars.
It helps caregivers report itch, mobility, social interaction and emotional impacts after burns.
Key findings
01The Brazilian version of the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile for caregivers of children under 8 years old was successfully translated and cross-culturally adapted.
02The instrument demonstrated adequate overall reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90, although the friendships and social interaction dimension had lower internal consistency.
03Expert review and pilot testing confirmed that the adapted items were understood by caregivers, with content validity indices meeting acceptable thresholds.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPsWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, which restricted outpatient access and may have influenced the low reliability score for the 'friendships and social interaction' dimension due to social isolation. The sample size for the pre-test was relatively small (34 caregivers). The pilot test used caregivers of children without burn scars, which may not fully capture the nuances of understanding for the target population with burn scars.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was approved by the Universidade Estadual de Londrina Research Ethics Committee.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume the 'friendships and social interaction' subscale is fully reliable for all contexts. Its low internal consistency (0.57) was noted by the authors, who attributed it partly to pandemic-related social isolation, so interpret scores in this domain with care outside similar conditions.