Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery
An open access publication of Association of Plastic Surgeons of India
Users Online: 348  
Home | Subscribe | Feedback | Login 
  Navigate here 
  Search
 
  
 Resource links
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Article in PDF (504 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  
  In this article
   References
   Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1287    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded60    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 


 
 Table of Contents    
LETTERS TO EDITOR
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 50  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 220-221
 

A modified Lund and Browder chart


Department of Surgery, Lautoka Hospital, Lautoka, Fiji

Date of Web Publication28-Dec-2017

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Arun Murari
Department of Surgery, Lautoka Hospital, P. O. Box: 65, Lautoka
Fiji
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijps.IJPS_77_17

Rights and Permissions



How to cite this article:
Murari A. A modified Lund and Browder chart. Indian J Plast Surg 2017;50:220-1

How to cite this URL:
Murari A. A modified Lund and Browder chart. Indian J Plast Surg [serial online] 2017 [cited 2019 Apr 20];50:220-1. Available from: http://www.ijps.org/text.asp?2017/50/2/220/221843


Sir,

Proper care of patients with burns requires an accurate assessment of the extent of the burnt area. The common methods used to measure this are the Lund and Browder chart (LB),[1] the rule of nines [2] and the patient's palm size method (for smaller burns).[3] Among these, the LB method is the most accurate and popular method of assessing percentage.[4],[5]

Burn wound assessment has to be done multiple times and by people with varying degrees of training and experience. The tool used for such an assessment must be as robust, precise and reliable as possible and should have the least possible scope for errors.

The conventional (adult) LB chart has anterior and posterior body schematics divided into regions which represent percentages of total body surface area. These regional percentages are often in fractions. The actual burnt area is usually irregular and covers only a part of the region on the chart. This has now to be accurately depicted onto the paper chart and calculations have to be done. First, the burnt fraction of the region has to be estimated and then the various fractions of different regions have to be added up. This estimation and calculations in fractions is difficult. Each time the observer makes an estimate and a calculation, there is a potential for an error. There can be significant errors and differences between different assessors,[6] and this can have a profound effect on treatment.

At our hospital, we have modified the adult LB chart in the following way [Figure 1]. Keeping the essential computational integrity of the LB chart intact, each region is subdivided into smaller areas by lines in such a manner that each resulting quadrilateral shape represents one quarter of 1% (0.25%). The assessor has to shade in or outline the burnt area on both anterior and posterior diagrams, then count the number of shaded or outlined quadrilaterals and divide by four to arrive at the total percentage of burnt body surface area. This counting of the squares and division by four is easily done and requires no dealing in fractions.
Figure 1: Adult body surface area grid chartAdult BSA grid chart

Click here to view


Thus, the resolution for this modified chart is 0.25%. Calculation can usually be done mentally and the result obtained can be easily counterchecked. Results are also consistent when repeated by different assessors. All that needs to be done is to count the number of shaded quadrilaterals and divide by four.

This modified LB chart was made using the open source GNU Image Manipulation Program.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Lund CC, Browder NC. The estimation of areas of burns. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1944;79:352-8.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Sabiston DC Jr., editor. In: Textbook of Surgery. 13th ed. W. B. Saunders Company; 1986. p. 215.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Amirsheybani HR, Crecelius GM, Timothy NH, Pfeiffer M, Saggers GC, Manders EK. The natural history of the growth of the hand: I. Hand area as a percentage of body surface area. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;107:726-33.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]    
4.
Hettiaratchy S, Papini R. Initial management of a major burn: II – Assessment and resuscitation. BMJ 2004;329:101-3.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]    
5.
Seyyed MM, Amir M. A comparison of burn size estimation methods' accuracy applied by medical students. Future Med Educ J 2014;4:36-40.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Harish V, Raymond AP, Issler AC, Lajevardi SS, Chang LY, Maitz PK, et al. Accuracy of burn size estimation in patients transferred to adult Burn Units in Sydney, Australia: An audit of 698 patients. Burns 2015;41:91-9.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
 

    

Site Map  |  Home  |  Contact Us  |  Feedback  |  Copyright and Disclaimer
Online since 11th March '04
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow