Analysis of Frequency of Use of Different Scar Assessment Scales Based on the Scar Condition and Treatment Method

Analysis of scars in various conditions is essential, but no consensus had been reached on the scar assessment scale to select for a given condition. We reviewed papers to determine the scar assessment scale selected depending on the scar condition and treatment method. We searched PubMed for articles published since 2000 with the contents of the scar evaluation using a scar assessment scale with a Journal Citation Report impact factor >0.5. Among them, 96 articles that conducted a scar evaluation using a scar assessment scale were reviewed and analyzed. The scar assessment scales were identified and organized by various criteria. Among the types of scar assessment scales, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was found to be the most frequently used scale. As for the assessment of newly developed operative scars, the POSAS was most used. Meanwhile, for categories depending on the treatment methods for preexisting scars, the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was used in 6 studies following a laser treatment, the POSAS was used in 7 studies following surgical treatment, and the POSAS was used in 7 studies following a conservative treatment. Within the 12 categories of scar status, the VSS showed the highest frequency in 6 categories and the POSAS showed the highest frequency in the other 6 categories. According to our reviews, the POSAS and VSS are the most frequently used scar assessment scales. In the future, an optimal, universal scar scoring system is needed in order to better evaluate and treat pathologic scarring.

Keywords

Cicatrix - Keloid - Visual analog scale

This work was supported by a 2-year research grant from Pusan National University.

This article was presented at the 3rd Research & Reconstructive forum on May 9-10, 2013 in Daegu, Korea.

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 22. April 2013

Angenommen: 23. Juli 2013

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
02. Mai 2022

• REFERENCES

• 1 van Zuijlen PP, Angeles AP, Kreis RW. et al. Scar assessment tools: implications for current research. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 109: 1108-1122
• 2 Sullivan T, Smith J, Kermode J. et al. Rating the burn scar. J Burn Care Rehabil 1990; 11: 256-260
• 3 Beausang E, Floyd H, Dunn KW. et al. A new quantitative scale for clinical scar assessment. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 102: 1954-1961
• 4 Draaijers LJ, Tempelman FR, Botman YA. et al. The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 113: 1960-1965
• 5 Fearmonti RM, Bond JE, Erdmann D. et al. The modified Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale: a novel approach to defining pathologic and nonpathologic scarring. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127: 242-247
• 6 Fearmonti R, Bond J, Erdmann D. et al. A review of scar scales and scar measuring devices. Eplasty 2010; 10: e43
• 7 Quinn JV, Drzewiecki AE, Stiell IG. et al. Appearance scales to measure cosmetic outcomes of healed lacerations. Am J Emerg Med 1995; 13: 229-231
• 8 Truong PT, Lee JC, Soer B. et al. Reliability and validity testing of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in evaluating linear scars after breast cancer surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 119: 487-494
• 9 Singer AJ, Arora B, Dagum A. et al. Development and validation of a novel scar evaluation scale. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 120: 1892-1897
• 10 Nicholas RS, Falvey H, Lemonas P. et al. Patient-related keloid scar assessment and outcome measures. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 129: 648-656