Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Goniometric measurement of burn scar contracture: a paradigm shift challenging the standard. AUTHORS.

Standard goniometry is the most commonly used method of assessing range of motion (ROM) in patients with burn scar contracture. However, standard goniometry was founded on arthrokinematic principles and doesn't consider the cutaneous biomechanical influence between adjacent joint positions and skin pliability to accommodate motion. Therefore, use of standard goniometry to measure burn scar contracture is called into question. This prospective, multi-center, comparative study investigated the difference between standard goniometry, based on arthrokinematics and a revised goniometry protocol, based on principles of cutaneokinematics and functional positions to measure ROM outcome in burn survivors. Data were collected for 174 joints from 66 subjects at seven burn centers totaling 1044 measurements for comparison. ROM findings using the revised protocol demonstrated significantly more limitation in motion 38.8%+15.2% than the standard protocol 32.1%+13.4% (p<.0001). Individual analyses of the motions likewise showed significantly more limitation with revised goniometry compared to standard goniometry for 9/11 joint motions. Pearson's correlation showed a significant positive correlation between the percentage of cutaneous functional units scarred and ROM outcome for the revised protocol (R2=.05,p=.0008) and the Δ between the revised and standard protocols (R2=.04,p=.0025) but no correlation was found with the standard goniometric protocol (R2=.015,p=.065). The results of this study support the hypothesis that standard goniometry underestimates the ROM impairment for individuals whose motion is limited by burn scars. Having measurement methods that consider the unique characteristics of skin impairment and the impact on functional positions is an important priority for both clinical reporting and future research in burn rehabilitation.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app