View clinical trials related to Burn Shock.
Filter by:Burn injury is marked by a large release of inflammatory mediators which disrupt the normal capillary barrier and cause a rapid shift of intravascular fluid into interstitial spaces, ultimately leading to shock and death. As such, adequate fluid management and resuscitation is critical for burn patients to prevent further cellular injury. Technologies and medical options such as cardiac output monitoring along with early tube feeding and vitamin C administration have developed slowly over the years. Effective management of the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome response and metabolic derangement is crucial for the survival of burn patients. In particular, vitamin C administration has shown to significantly decreases early post-burn lipid peroxidation, reduce microvascular leak of fluid by preventing endothelial dysfunction, and decreases edema formation in burned tissue. Vitamin C is a cheap and widely available antioxidant which has been shown to significantly effective in positively impacting clinical outcomes in burn resuscitation. We aim to evaluate the efficacy of vitamin C in burns greater than 20% total body surface area on clinical outcomes such as length of hospital stay, total fluid requirements, and mortality.
Nepal and the South Asian sub-continent carry some of the highest rates of burn injury globally, with associated high morbidity and mortality. Nepal currently has one major center equipped for comprehensive burn care, in Kirtipur, Nepal, and receives patients who are referred from around the country. At the time of presentation, most patients with major burns have had minimal to no resuscitation on arrival, and often present hours to days after the burn injury was sustained. Timely fluid resuscitation, initiated as soon as possible after a major burn injury, is the main tenet of acute burn care. Lack of adequate resuscitation in major burn injuries leads to kidney injury, progression of burn injury, sepsis, burn shock, and death. The current standard of care for major burn resuscitation is intravenous fluid resuscitation. However, in low- and middle-income countries such as Nepal, adequately trained and equipped hospitals for the treatment of burn care are not widely available (for a variety of reasons). Additionally, there is no systematic emergency medical transport system available to provide medical care and resuscitation during transport. Enteral-based resuscitation-drinking or administering fluids via the gastrointestinal tract-with substances like the WHO Oral Rehydration Solution (ORS) is recommended by burn experts and professional burn societies when resources and access to intravenous fluid resuscitation are not available. Studies have previously demonstrated the efficacy and safety of enteral-based resuscitation in controlled, high-resource settings, however, there have not been real-world effectiveness trials in resource-constrained settings. Therefore, the investigators seek to ultimately address the problem of pre-hospital and pre-burn center admission resuscitation by studying the effectiveness of enteral resuscitation with Oral Rehydration Solution (ORS) in preventing burn shock. A recent feasibility and pilot study(n=30) of this Enteral-based implementation bundle (EResus) i.e., training resources, protocol, and toolkit were conducted. The pilot study allowed for protocol development and testing, established the feasibility, provided key insights into implementation and helped develop infrastructure and study standard operating procedures at the study site. With the current study, the investigators aim to expand the trial to a full effectiveness-implementation trial, which will allow to further hone the EResus protocol and bundle, generate more effective implementation strategies, and obtain a clearer understanding of efficacy and frequency of specific outcomes. This study examines enteral-based resuscitation (i.e. enteral with/without IV Fluids) versus enhanced standard of care IV Fluids for the treatment of major burn injuries. The intervention portion of the study will entail randomization of patients presenting with acute burn injuries of 15-40% total body surface area (TBSA) to an enteral-based resuscitation versus the standard of care IV fluid resuscitation. The intervention will continue through the acute resuscitation period. The primary study variables will include measures of urine output, vital signs, planned and administered resuscitation volumes, and routes of resuscitation along with frequency, timing, and treatment of any gastrointestinal symptomology, and serious adverse events such as kidney injury and aspiration events Further, there will be a qualitative component to the study with focus group discussions of the bedside healthcare providers (doctors and nurses) caring for the enrolled patients, in order to understand the challenges and facilitators of enteral resuscitation. In-depth interviews will be conducted with enrolled patients and their families to further understand the patient perception, experience and challenges and facilitators. Qualitative analysis will be done to understand the major themes of challenges and facilitators to enteral resuscitation.
Effect of pre-emptive intravenous immunoglobulin administration on the incidence of septic episodes in pediatric burn patients: A randomized controlled study.
The adequacy of fluid resuscitation will be monitored in burn patients using microcirculation. Microcirculation camera will be placed on the base of the tongue and at different four quadrants. • Microcirculation parameters at baseline and after 8h , 16h and 24h of fluid resuscitation will be recorded. Fluid resuscitation with lactated ringer according to Parkland formula (4 ml/kg/%TBSA) 50% given during the first 8 hours, with the remainder given during the following 16 hours, will be initiated to maintain a urinary output of 0.5ml/kg/hr.Norepinephrine infusion will be started in case of circulatory failure at a rate of 0.02mic/kg/min to maintain MAP of 65-70mmHg.
Nepal and the South Asian sub-continent carry some of the highest rates of burn injury globally, with an associated high morbidity and mortality. Nepal currently has one major center equipped for burn care, in Kirtipur, Nepal and receives referred patients from around the country. At presentation, most patients with major burns have had minimal to no resuscitation on arrival, often hours to days after the burn injury was sustained. Timely fluid resuscitation, initiated as soon as possible after major burn injury, is the main tenet of acute burn care. Lack of adequate resuscitation in major burn injuries leads to kidney injury, progression of burn injury, sepsis, burn shock, and death. The current standard of care for major burn resuscitation is intravenous fluid resuscitation. In Nepal, however, adequately trained and equipped hospitals for treatment of burn care are not available (for a variety of reasons). Additionally, there is not a systematic emergency medical transport system available for provision of medical care and resuscitation during transport. Enteral-based resuscitation with substances like the WHO Oral Rehydration Solution (ORS) is recommended by burn experts and the professional burn societies when resources and access to intravenous fluid resuscitation are not available in resource-constrained settings such as rural areas, low- and middle-income countries, and military battlefield scenarios. Studies have previously demonstrated the efficacy and safety of enteral-based resuscitation in controlled, high-resource settings, however there have not been real-world effectiveness trials in austere settings. Therefore, the investigators seek to ultimately address the problem of pre-hospital and pre-burn center admission resuscitation by studying the feasibility and effectiveness of enteral resuscitation with Oral Rehydration Solution (ORS) in preventing burn shock. This study examines enteral (oral)-based resuscitation with ORS and IV Fluids versus only IV Fluids for the treatment of major burn injuries. The intervention portion of the study will entail randomization of patients presenting with acute burn injuries of 20-40% total body surface area (TBSA) to an enteral-based resuscitation versus the standard of care IV fluid resuscitation. The intervention will continue through the 24-72 hours of the acute resuscitation period. This is a feasibility study, primarily to develop and establish the research infrastructure and practices at the study site for future pilot study and eventually randomized-controlled trial research on this intervention. The primary outcomes will be measures of feasibility such as the adherence rate to the resuscitation protocols. Further, there will be a qualitative component to the study with focus group interviews of the bedside healthcare providers (doctors and nurses) who are caring for the enrolled patients, in order to understand the challenges and facilitators of enteral resuscitation. Qualitative analysis will be done to understand the major themes of challenges and facilitators to enteral resuscitation.