PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 1, 2025Journal of Burn Care & Research0 citationsOpen Access

Small burns need attention too: evaluating the 15% burn resuscitation threshold in adults

View Full Paper
ABAshleigh BullMSMala SharmaAKAlexander Kurjatko

Key Points

  • Patients with burns of 15 to 19.9% TBSA showed varied responses to fluid resuscitation, with half receiving more than maintenance fluids.
  • Among the 33 patients analyzed, 15 were within the Parkland formula range, while 50% required increased fluid resuscitation post-admission.
  • Fluid resuscitation strategies compared urine output and demographic data but found no significant differences between groups.
  • This research indicates that small burns may require more extensive examination for effective resuscitation practices.

Abstract

Abstract The American Burn Life Support (ABLS) course recommends fluid resuscitation of patients with total burned surface area (TBSA) ≥20% to prevent burn shock. Our center resuscitates patients with burns greater than 15% TBSA. Herein, we characterize that population. Patients with burns 15 to 19.9% TBSA admitted from 1/1/2019 to 3/31/2023 who received protocolized fluid resuscitation were included. Demographics, hospital course, and fluids received were reviewed. Fluid resuscitation was categorized as “below range” (Parkland formula PF 3 mL/kg/%TBSA), “within range” (PF = 3-5 mL/kg/%TBSA or “above range” (PF 5 mL/kg/%TBSA). Similarly, urine output (UOP) was expressed as “below range” (30 mL/h), “within range” (31-50 mL/h) or “above range” (50 mL/h). The resuscitation groups were compared. p.05 was considered significant. Thirty-three patients received resuscitation via Brooke (9.1%), PF (63.6%), or other formula (27.3%). Most were male (81.8%) with a median TBSA of 17%; median age was 57 years. Almost 20% of patients required vasopressors during resuscitation. Fifteen patients were within the predicated range of PF, 15 were under, and 3 were over. There was no difference between the groups with respect to demographics, burn injury variables, or complications. Notably, the average creatinine and lactate 24 h post-admission were 0.9 mg/dL and 2 mg/dL, respectively. Half of the study patients received greater than maintenance; all were in either the within burn resuscitation range or above range groups. This retrospective study suggests that patients with smaller burns may benefit from resuscitation as 50% received more than maintenance. Resuscitation of smaller burns requires more study.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bull et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68dd89d7fe798ba2fc497a6bhttps://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/iraf185
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 18 Burn Shock: What Defines a Failing Fluid Resuscitation?2024
  2. 2Renal function after severe burn trauma - effects of reducing resuscitation fluid volume and changing fluid tonicity2025
  3. 3850. Before-and-After Adoption of a New Fluid Resuscitation Protocol - Parkland Formula versus ABA Consensus Formula2026
  4. 4650. Re-evaluating Resuscitation Thresholds in Elderly Burn Patients2026
  5. 5651. Variation in Adult Burn Resuscitation Protocols Across ABA-Verified U.S. Burn Centers: A Cross-Sectional Review2026