Skip to content

Feasibility and Reliability of Ultrasound in Acute Burns.

Feasibility and Reliability of Ultrasound Assessment of Muscle Architecture in Acute Burns.

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04852133
Enrollment
20
Registered
2021-04-21
Start date
2020-05-04
Completion date
2021-04-06
Last updated
2021-10-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Burns

Keywords

Burns, Ultrasound, Muscle wasting, Muscular Atrophy, Reliability, Feasibility

Brief summary

This trial investigates the feasibility and reliability of different ultrasound protocols to determine quadriceps muscle architecture in acutely admitted burn patients. The results of this trial will provide more clarity as to whether ultrasound can be used as a bedside tool to monitor muscle wasting.

Detailed description

BACKGROUND Despite the ubiquity of muscle wasting following burns, practical and accurate tools to measure the degree of muscle wasting are lacking in burn care. Ultrasound has been used for this purpose in the critically-ill population and has shown to be valid and reliable. Whether this can be extrapolated to the burn population, however, remains unclear. Open wounds, fluid status, and uncertainty regarding which protocol to use are amongst factors that complicate the use of ultrasound during the acute phase of burns. AIM This study examines the reliability and feasibility of ultrasound measures in the acute burn setting comparing different techniques and locations of application. METHODS Burned adults were assessed at admission in two Belgian burn centers by two trained assessors using B-mode ultrasound with a linear transducer. Ultrasound-derived variables included quadriceps muscle layer thickness (QMLT) and rectus femoris cross-sectional area (RF-CSA) on both thighs. Both maximum and minimum compression techniques were used for QMLT, while RF-CSA was determined by minimum compression only. QMLT was measured at a proximal and distal location on the thigh, and RF-CSA was measured at the most proximal location possible where the entire muscle belly still remained visible.

Interventions

OTHERBurn subjects

see eligibility criteria

Sponsors

Research Foundation Flanders
CollaboratorOTHER
Universiteit Antwerpen
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_CONTROL
Time perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

Burn subjects: Inclusion Criteria: * ≥10 - ≤80 %TBSA * Burn depth: 2nd deep / 3rd degree

Exclusion criteria

* Electrical burn (except flash burns) * Associated injury: fracture lower limb * Diabetes Mellitus type 1 * Central / peripheral neurological/neuromuscular disorders (interfering with exercise) * Cognitive / psychological disorders (interfering with cooperation) * Cardiopulmonary disease (interfering with exercise safety) * Pregnancy * Palliative care Healthy subjects: * none

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Reliability<72 hours of admissionInterrater reliability of QMLT and RF-CSA assessed by intraclass correlation

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Feasibility of measurements<72 hours of admissionFeasibility of different techniques and locations of measurements, assessed by number of realised vs attempted measurements

Countries

Belgium

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026