Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Skin scar preconceptions must be challenged: Importance of self-perception in skin scarring

Brown, Ben; Moss, Timothy; Bayat, Ardeshir; McGrouther, D. A.

Skin scar preconceptions must be challenged: Importance of self-perception in skin scarring Thumbnail


Authors

Ben Brown

Tim Moss Tim.Moss@uwe.ac.uk
Director of PGR Studies and Associate Professor

Ardeshir Bayat

D. A. McGrouther



Abstract

Greater objective scar severity and visibility should intuitively cause greater psychosocial distress for patients. Previous research is contradictory and has employed non-validated scar severity measures whilst neglecting patient-rated severity. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of objective and patient-rated scar severity, scar type and location on psychosocial distress. Skin scars were quantitatively assessed on two independent occasions using the 'Manchester Scar Scale' (MSS) - a validated measure. Scars were scored twice independently. Patients also rated their scars (from 'very good' [zero] to 'poor' [four]) and good completed the Derriford Appearance Scale (DAS24) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Eighty-two patients, with an average ± SD (range) age of 34 ± 15 (16-65) years were recruited. Mean psychosocial questionnaire scores were: DAS24 45.5 ± 17.8 (15-91); DLQI 7.5 ± 6.7 (0-26). Participants had 1.9 ± 1.5 (1-8) scars with an MSS score of 31.3 ± 24.0 (6.6-162.0) and subjective score of 2.6 ± 1.2 (0-4). Correlation between psychosocial distress and objective severity was not significant (DAS24 0.14 p = 0.11; DLQI 0.16 p = 0.06). Correlation between psychosocial distress and subjective severity was significant (DAS24 0.48 p < 0.0001; DLQI 0.46 p < 0.0001). Patients with non-visible scars experienced greater psychosocial distress than patients with visible scars (DAS24 9.7 p = 0.046; DLQI 4.2 p = 0.014). Scar type was unrelated to psychosocial distress. Patient-rated scar severity and scar visibility are correlated with psychosocial distress rather than clinician's objective severity rating or scar type. Although counter-intuitive, results are consistent with research into other disfiguring conditions and patient self-assessment should therefore form an integral part of clinical assessment. © 2009 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons.

Journal Article Type Article
Publication Date Jun 1, 2010
Deposit Date Sep 27, 2010
Publicly Available Date Mar 1, 2016
Journal Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery
Print ISSN 1748-6815
Publisher Elsevier
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 63
Issue 6
Pages 1022-1029
DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2009.03.019
Keywords surgery, psychology, appearance, scarring severity, quality of life, pre-conceptions, self-perception, visible difference
Public URL https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/978356
Publisher URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2009.03.019
Additional Information Additional Information : Ranking: 27 of 166 in Surgery, Impact Factor: 2.743
Contract Date Mar 1, 2016

Files


Skin_scar_severity-14_revision.doc (424 Kb)
Document







You might also like



Downloadable Citations