Technologies used in the treatment of burn victims in intensive care: a scope review.
Kyohana Matos de Freitas Clementino, Gabriela Duarte Bezerra, Gleice Adriana Araujo Gonçalves and 3 others
PMID 38747745WHAT IT FOUND
A scoping review of 14 studies mapped wound care technologies for burn patients in intensive care, identifying dressings, biological agents, and pain relief methods.
No single standardized approach was found; choice depends on burn assessment, local conditions, and cost-effectiveness.
Key findings
01The review identified technologies for pain management, infection control, and wound care, but found no single standardized approach to nursing care in burn treatment.
02Hard technologies like silver dressings, hydrogels, and negative pressure wound therapy were frequently cited, while soft technologies focusing on interpersonal relationships were not evident in the studies.
03Included studies varied widely in design, from randomized trials to expert opinions, with a lack of detailed information on specific compositions and dosages for many technologies.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat 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 review included a mix of study designs, from randomized trials to expert opinions, which limits the ability to draw strong conclusions about efficacy. Many included studies lacked comprehensive details on the specific compositions, application methods, and dosages of the technologies. The search may have missed some relevant studies due to the absence of controlled descriptors in some databases. The review did not perform a meta-analysis or assess the quality of individual studies beyond level of evidence classification, so it maps available evidence rather than testing its strength.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as a guideline recommending specific technologies over others. The review maps what has been studied but explicitly states there is no single standardized approach and that many studies lacked detailed information on dosages and compositions, making direct clinical application difficult without further evidence.