ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 90K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
FLUID RESUSCITATION IN MAJOR BURNS
Biswadev Mitra,* Mark Fitzgerald,*† Peter Cameron*†‡ Heather Cleland§
  * The Alfred Emergency and Trauma Centre ,  National Trauma Research Institute,  Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, and  §The Alfred Burns Unit, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
 Correspondence: Dr Biswadev Mitra, The Alfred Emergency and Trauma Centre, Prahran, Vic. 3181, Australia.
Email: tamponade@bigpond.com

  B. Mitra MB BS;  M. Fitzgerald MB BS, FACEM;  P. Cameron MD, BS, FACEM;  H. Cleland MB BS, FRACS.

Copyright 2006 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons
KEYWORDS
burns • emergency • fluid • Parkland • resuscitation

ABSTRACT

Background:  The Parkland formula is established as the 'gold standard' for initial fluid resuscitation for major burns. The purpose of this study was to review our fluid resuscitation practice for major burns to determine whether anecdotal observations of significant variations from the Parkland formula were wide spread and whether any difference could be used as a basis for a revision of fluid resuscitation in major burns.

Methods:  A retrospective review of 127 presentations to The Alfred Burns Unit with total body surface area (TBSA) affected ≥15% was conducted. A retrospective review of the resuscitation data from these patients was compared with the Parkland formula as well as other studies.

Results:  A total of 49 patients with complete data on fluid administration and uncomplicated burns were included in the analysis. Significantly larger volumes of fluid (5.58 mL/kg per %TBSA) were given to these patients in the first 24 h than predicted by the Parkland formula. Mean arterial pressure, pulse rate and urine output were at satisfactory levels. Clinically evident complications from fluid administration were minimal. Mortality was similar to that in other centres.

Conclusion:  Fluid resuscitation volumes significantly higher than those predicted by the Parkland formula were given, without adverse consequences. This retrospective review supports a prospective, multicentre, randomized, controlled study comparing this study with the Parkland formula, resulting in a better guide to initial fluid resuscitation in major burns.


Accepted for publication 11 August 2005.

DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1111/j.1445-2197.2006.03641.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member


Sign Up Now
Sign Up Now