Modern Burn Care Research Articles

Predicting and managing sepsis in burn patients: current perspectives.

Modern burn care has led to unprecedented survival rates in burn patients whose injuries were fatal a few decades ago. Along with improved survival, new challenges have emerged in the management of burn patients. Infections top the list of the most common complication after burns, and sepsis is the leading cause of death in both adult and pediatric burn patients. The diagnosis and management of sepsis in burns is complex as a tremendous hypermetabolic response secondary to burn injury can be superimposed on systemic infection, leading to organ dysfunction. The management of a septic burn patient represents a challenging scenario that is commonly encountered by providers caring for burn patients despite preventive efforts. Here, we discuss the current perspectives in the diagnosis and treatment of sepsis and septic shock in burn patients.

Intraoperative Feeding Improves Calorie and Protein Delivery in Acute Burn Patients.

Enteral nutrition support is a critical component of modern burn care for severely burned patients. However, tube feeds are frequently withheld during the perioperative period because of aspiration concerns. As a result, patients requiring multiple operative procedures risk accumulating significant protein-calorie deficits. The objective of this study was to describe our American Burn Association-certified burn center's experience implementing an intraoperative feeding protocol in severely burned patients defined as a cutaneous burn ≥20% TBSA. A retrospective review of patients with major thermal injuries (2008-2013). Thirty-three patients with an average of seven operating room trips (range, 2-21 trips) were evaluated. Seventeen patients received intraoperative enteral feeds (protocol group) and 16 patients did not (standard group). Feeding was performed using an enteral feeding tube placed postpylorically and was continued intraoperatively, regardless of operative positioning. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the groups (P = .62). No intraoperative aspiration or regurgitation events were recorded. The protocol group received significantly more calculated protein and caloric requirements, 98.06 and 98.4%, respectively, compared with 70.6 and 73.2% in the standard group (P < .001). Time to goal tube feed infusion rate was achieved on average 3 days sooner in the protocol group compared with the standard group (3.35 vs 6.18 days, P = .008). Early initiation and continuation of enteral feeds in severely burned patients led to higher percentages received of prescribed goal protein and caloric needs without increased rates of aspiration, regurgitation, or mortality.

Low cardiac index and stroke volume on admission are associated with poor outcome in critically ill burn patients: a retrospective cohort study.

BackgroundImpact of early systemic hemodynamic alterations and fluid resuscitation on outcome in the modern burn care remains controversial. We investigate the association between acute-phase systemic hemodynamics, timing of fluid resuscitation and outcome in critically ill burn patients.MethodsRetrospective, single-center cohort study was conducted in a university hospital. Forty critically ill burn patients with total body surface area (TBSA) burn-injured >20 % with invasive blood pressure and cardiac output monitoring (transpulmonary thermodilution technique) within 8 h from trauma were included. We retrospectively examined hemodynamic variables during the first 24 h following admission, and their association with 90-day mortality.ResultsThe median (interquartile range 25th–75th percentile) TBSA, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) and Abbreviated Burn Severity Index of the study population were 41 (29–56), 31 (23–50) and 9 (7–11) %, respectively. 90-Day mortality was 42 %. There was no statistical difference between the median pre-hospital and 24-h administered fluid volume in survivors and non-survivors. On admission, stroke volume (SV), cardiac index (CI), oxygen delivery index and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were significantly lower in patients who died despite similar fluid resuscitation volume. ROC curves comparing the ability of initial SV, CI, MAP and lactate to discriminate 90-day mortality gave areas under curves of, respectively, 0.89 (CI 0.77–1), 0.77 (CI 0.58–0.95), 0.73 (CI 0.53–0.93) and 0.78 (CI 0.63–0.92); (p value <0.05 for all). In multivariate analysis, SAPS II and initial SV were independently associated with 90-day mortality (best cutoff value for SV was 27 mL, sensitivity 92 %, specificity 69 %). During 24 h, no interaction was found between time and outcome regarding macrocirculatory parameters changes. Hemodynamic parameters improved during the first 24-h resuscitation in all patients but patients who died had lower SV and CI on admission, which remained through the first 24 h.ConclusionLow initial SV and CI were associated with poor outcome in critically ill burn patients. Very early hemodynamic monitoring may in help detecting under-resuscitated patients. Future prospective interventional studies should explore the impact of early goal-directed therapy in these specific patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13613-016-0192-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Threshold age and burn size associated with poor outcomes in the elderly after burn injury

Elderly burn care represents a vast challenge. The elderly are one of the most susceptible populations to burn injuries, but also one of the fastest growing demographics, indicating a substantial increase in patient numbers in the near future. Despite the need and importance of elderly burn care, survival of elderly burn patients is poor. Additionally, little is known about the responses of elderly patients after burn. One central question that has not been answered is what age defines an elderly patient. The current study was conducted to determine whether there is a cut-off age for elderly burn patients that is correlated with an increased risk for mortality and to determine the burn size in modern burn care that is associated with increased mortality. To answer these questions, we applied appropriate statistical analyses to the Ross Tilley Burn Centre and the Inflammatory and Host Response to Injury databases. We could not find a clear cut-off age that differentiates or predicts between survival and death. Risk of death increased linearly with increasing age. Additionally, we found that the LD50 decreases from 45% total body surface area (TBSA) to 25% TBSA from the age of 55 years to the age of 70 years, indicating that even small burns lead to poor outcome in the elderly. We therefore concluded that age is not an ideal to predictor of burn outcome, but we strongly suggest that burn care providers be aware that if an elderly patient sustains even a 25% TBSA burn, the risk of mortality is 50% despite the implementation of modern protocolized burn care.

Use of dermal regeneration templates in a low resource environment.

Modern burn care in a sophisticated well-resourced centre in a rich country utilises an increasing number of expensive adjuncts to optimise outcomes such as dermal templates, cultured keratinocytes, biological and silver impregnated dressings. Translating the use of these into a low resource environment is not a simple matter of providing the materials free of charge and there needs to be careful consideration of both the positive and negative consequences and the impact on both an individual and a population level.

Morbidity and survival probability in burn patients in modern burn care.

Characterizing burn sizes that are associated with an increased risk of mortality and morbidity is critical because it would allow identifying patients who might derive the greatest benefit from individualized, experimental, or innovative therapies. Although scores have been established to predict mortality, few data addressing other outcomes exist. The objective of this study was to determine burn sizes that are associated with increased mortality and morbidity after burn. Burn patients were prospectively enrolled as part of the multicenter prospective cohort study, Inflammation and the Host Response to Injury Glue Grant, with the following inclusion criteria: 0-99 years old, admission within 96 hours after injury, and more than 20% total body surface area burns requiring at least one surgical intervention. Six major burn centers in North America. Burn size cutoff values were determined for mortality, burn wound infection (at least two infections), sepsis (as defined by American Burn Association sepsis criteria), pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and multiple organ failure (Denver 2 score>3) for both children (<16 yr) and adults (16-65 yr). Five hundred seventy-three patients were enrolled, of which 226 patients were children. Twenty-three patients were older than 65 years and were excluded from the cutoff analysis. In children, the cutoff burn size for mortality, sepsis, infection, and multiple organ failure was approximately 60% total body surface area burned. In adults, the cutoff for these outcomes was lower, at approximately 40% total body surface area burned. In the modern burn care setting, adults with over 40% total body surface area burned and children with over 60% total body surface area burned are at high risk for morbidity and mortality, even in highly specialized centers.

Burn care in the 1800s.

The 1800s show a wide range of both understanding and misinterpretation of the pathophysiology and treatment of burns. The objective of this paper was to describe the key advancements in the study and treatment of burns in the 1800s. We reviewed primary and secondary sources of ancient to modern burn care manuscripts. Prior to the 1800s, burn care was different iterations of poultices and oils placed over acute burns in the hope the patient would survive. The 1800s showed the discoveries of the Curling and Marjolin's ulcers as well as the first understanding of inhalation injury and advancements in skin grafting, leading to further understanding of the disease process.

Pediatric burn wound impetigo after grafting.

Modern burn care techniques have reduced the risk of infection of the acute burn wound, resulting in more rapid healing and a lower incidence of graft loss. Secondary breakdown may still occur. The loss of epithelium in association with multifocal superficial abscesses and ulceration has been termed burns impetigo. This may result in considerable morbidity and require prolonged treatment. The events preceding development, the impact on the patient, and the ideal treatment appear unclear and poorly reported. In 5 years, between 2006 and 2011, 406 pediatric burns were treated with skin grafts, with 7% developing burns impetigo. Time to resolution ranged from 5 to 241 days: the mean time to complete healing was greatest with conservative management (96 days), followed by antibacterial dressings (37 days), oral antibiotics (36 days), topical steroids (16 days), and oral antibiotics in combination with topical steroids (13.5 days). Burns impetigo resulted in significant morbidity, requiring multiple visits to the treatment center and prolonged symptoms. Delay in diagnosis and treatment resulted in worse outcomes. Prompt consideration of burns impetigo should occur when postgraft patients present with suggestive clinical signs and treatment with oral antibiotics plus topical steroids should be considered.

Burn disaster-management planning: a preparedness tool kit.

It is vital that preburn center emergency providers have the knowledge and equipment needed to treat burn-injured patients should there be an extended delay in transporting the patients to a burn center as may be the case during a mass-casualty incident or weather-related emergency. Since 2007 a collaborative effort has been underway to build an emergency-response tool kit that provides to and draws from local, state, and federal resources. This tool kit is designed to fill knowledge deficits regarding burn treatment as well as address gaps in stockpiled treatment materials. This tool kit was implemented in four modules: provide equipment, provide guidance, provide education, and provide drill. Module one ensures that equipment needed for treating burn injuries is available to emergency providers. Module two ensures that policies and procedures congruent with the practice of the regional burn center are in place. Module three ensures that preburn center providers are provided education on modern burn care. Module four is to drill. The sum of the effort by the authors is the establishment of a tool kit that enhances the capabilities of preburn center emergency providers. Implementation has led to improved collaborative relationships, increased the awareness of available resources, and reduced knowledge deficit regarding burn care among preburn center providers. This tool kit provides greater continuity of care for all burn patients affected by a delay in transport to a burn center, and its modular structure makes it adaptable to other regions as a whole or in part.

Citation Classics in the Burn Literature During the Past 55 Years

The objective of this study was to identify the 100 most cited, peer-reviewed burn-related articles over the past half century. Burn care presents ongoing challenges to both U.S. civilian and military healthcare personnel. Improvements in burn survival and quality of life are the result of advances in burn research. The Web of Science (including Science Citation Index) was searched for the most cited articles related to burn care, published from 1955 to the present. The most cited article was "Permanent coverage of large burn wounds with autologous cultured human epithelium," by G.G. Gallico et al, New England Journal of Medicine, 1984 (711 citations). Between the 1970s and the 1990s, there was a near doubling of the number of highly cited publications with each subsequent decade. A total of 85% of the articles were on the topics of pathophysiology (37%), wounds, tissue, or dressings (31%), or organ failure/sepsis (17%). B.A. Pruitt Jr. (2320 citations), D.N. Herndon (1972 citations), and A.D. Mason Jr. (1435 citations) were the most cited authors. This study identified some of the most important contributions to burn research and the areas of greatest scientific interest to the specialty during the past five decades, and highlights key research that has contributed to the evolution of modern burn care.

The determination of total burn surface area: How much difference?

Burn depth and burn size are crucial determinants for assessing patients suffering from burns [1]. Therefore, a correct evaluation of these factors is optimal for adapting the appropriate treatment in modern burn care. Burn surface assessment is subject to considerable differences among clinicians [2].This work investigated the accuracy among experts based on conventional surface estimation methods (e.g. “Rule of Palm”, “Rule of Nines” or “Lund–Browder Chart”). The estimation results were compared to a computer-based evaluation method.Survey data was collected during one national and one international burn conference. The poll confirmed deviations of burn depth/size estimates of up to 62% in relation to the mean value of all participants. In comparison to the computer-based method, overestimation of up to 161% was found.We suggest introducing improved methods for burn depth/size assessment in clinical routine in order to efficiently allocate and distribute the available resources for practicing burn care.

Cost of providing inpatient burn care in a tertiary, teaching, hospital of North India

There is an extreme paucity of studies examining cost of burn care in the developing world when over 85% of burns take place in low and middle income countries. Modern burn care is perceived as an expensive, resource intensive endeavour, requiring specialized equipment, personnel and facilities to provide optimum care. If ‘burn burden’ of low and middle income countries (LMICs) is to be tackled deftly then besides prevention and education we need to have burn centres where ‘reasonable’ burn care can be delivered in face of resource constraints. This manuscript calculates the cost of providing inpatient burn management at a large, high volume, tertiary burn care facility of North India by estimating all cost drivers.In this one year study (1st February to 31st January 2012), in a 50 bedded burn unit, demographic parameters like age, gender, burn aetiology, % TBSA burns, duration of hospital stay and mortality were recorded for all patients. Cost drivers included in estimation were all medications and consumables, dressing material, investigations, blood products, dietary costs, and salaries of all personnel. Capital costs, utility costs and maintenance expenditure were excluded. The burn unit is constrained to provide conservative management, by and large, and is serviced by a large team of doctors and nurses. Entire treatment cost is borne by the hospital for all patients.797 patients (208 <12 years old) with acute burn were admitted with a mean age of 23.04 years (range 18 days to 83 years). The mean BSA burn was 42.26% (ranging from 2% to 100%). 378/797 patients (47.43%) sustained up to 30% BSA burns, 216 patients (27.1%) had between 31 and 60% BSA and 203 patients (25.47%) had >60% BSA burns. 258/797 patients died (32.37%). Of these deaths 16, 68 and 174 patients were from 0 to 30%, 31 to 60% and >60% BSA groups, respectively. The mean length of hospitalization for all admissions was 7.86 days (ranging from 1 to 62 days) and for survivors it was 8.9 days. There were 299 operations carried out in the dedicated burns theatre.The total expenditure for the study period was Indian Rupees (Rs) 46,488,067 or US$ 845,237. At 1 US$=Rs 55 it makes the cost per patient to be US$ 1060.5. Almost 70% of cost of burn management resulted from salaries, followed by investigations (11.56%) and dressings (8.24%). The mean cost of investigations per patient was Rs 6742.46 (US$ 122.59). Only 147/797 patients received 322 units of blood. Thus, the average cost of blood transfusion for all admissions was Rs 521.17 (US$ 9.47).Our study is evidence to direct costs of providing burn care in a tertiary centre of a low income country, and the large number of patients in our study while averaging the costs also validates the estimates. The ‘reasonability’ of care being delivered is defined by adequate resuscitation, daily topical dressings, appropriate surgery (escharotomy, debridement, and skin grafting), adequate nutrition and physical therapy. The ‘reasonability’ of outcomes can be measured by mortality figures. The bottom line of management is strict observation by burn staff. The low mean hospital stay also reflects our admission and discharge policy which is to benefit the maximum number of patients who require resuscitative/intensive care, and who have extensive and deep wounds, or injury of critical nature.We conclude that providing burn care based on our model can be emulated in other LICs as the costing is driven by ‘necessity of expense’ rather than ‘ability to spend’.

The 21st century burn care team

The 21st century burn care team epitomises integrated multidisciplinary care. The physical, psychological and socials needs of burn victims necessitates the close collaboration of a broad spectrum of health care professionals. The ultimate aim is to return the patient to the optimal level of physical and psychological health and social function.The modern burn care team must not only consider the staffing and structure of the team, but also the way in which the team is to be delivered to the patient. Furthermore, the 21st century burn care team must be willing to adapt and evolve during the likely NHS re-structuring that will come with the Health and Social Care Act 2012, as well as integrate with the new UK trauma networks.This paper discusses the staffing and structure of the 21st century burn care team along with the future challenges and opportunities it may be presented with.

Trajectories to death in patients with burn injury

With unprecedented survival rates in modern burn care, there is increasing focus on optimizing long-term functional outcomes. However, 3% to 8% of patients admitted to burn centers still die of injury. Patterns in which these patients progress to death remain poorly characterized. We hypothesized that burn nonsurvivors will follow distinct temporal distributions and patterns of decline, parallel to the trimodality of deaths previously described for trauma. We retrospectively identified all adult deaths from 1995 to 2007 in the National Burn Repository database (n = 5,975) and at our regional burn center (n = 237). We stratified patients by age and analyzed injury and death characteristics. We used objective criteria to allocate nonsurvivors to one of four trajectories: early rapid decline, early organ failure, late sudden death, or late-onset decline. The greatest concentration of deaths in both samples and age groups occurred within 72 hours of injury and decreased subsequently with no later mortality peak. Death was most often caused by burn shock within the first week of injury, cardiogenic shock or lung injury in Weeks 1 to 2, and sepsis/multiorgan failure after Week 2. In decreasing frequency, trajectories to death fit the pattern of early rapid decline (58%), early organ failure (20%), late-onset decline (16%), and late sudden death (6%). Most burn deaths follow a pattern of early rapid decline or early organ failure manifested by death or critical illness within several days of the burn. These findings indicate that more than three quarters of burn deaths are attributable to failure or significant decompensation beginning in the resuscitation phase. Sporadic deaths later in hospitalization are uncommon. Despite significant advances in burn resuscitation, our data indicate that ongoing efforts to mitigate deaths in modern burn care should still focus on care improvements in the resuscitation phase. Epidemiologic study, level III.

Survival of children with burn injuries

Excellent progress has been made in patients' survival after burn injury during the past five decades. Since the first study in 1949, 1 Bull JP Squire JR A study of mortality in a burns unit: standards for the evaluation of alternative methods of treatment. Ann Surg. 1949; 130: 160-173 Crossref PubMed Scopus (142) Google Scholar the likelihood of survival has improved substantially, with the last major analysis in 1998 2 Ryan CM Schoenfeld DA Thorpe WP et al. Objective estimates of the probability of death from burn injuries. N Engl J Med. 1998; 338: 362-366 Crossref PubMed Scopus (566) Google Scholar showing that the major determinants of mortality are age older than 60 years and, for all ages, burn size greater than 40% of total body surface area (TBSA) and presence of direct injury to the lung (eg, inhalation injury). The increase in likelihood of survival at all ages, but particularly in children, has largely resulted from early surgical excision of the burn then immediate closure of the wound with the patient's own skin or other biological materials. Improvements in modern critical care and anaesthesia management have further supported these advances in both children and adults. Burn size and survival probability in paediatric patients in modern burn care: a prospective observational cohort studyWe established that, in a modern paediatric burn care setting, a burn size of roughly 60% TBSA is a crucial threshold for postburn morbidity and mortality. On the basis of these findings, we recommend that paediatric patients with greater than 60% TBSA burns be immediately transferred to a specialised burn centre. Furthermore, at the burn centre, patients should be treated with increased vigilance and improved therapies, in view of the increased risk of poor outcome associated with this burn size. Full-Text PDF

Burn size and survival probability in paediatric patients in modern burn care: a prospective observational cohort study

Patient survival after severe burn injury is largely determined by burn size. Modern developments in burn care have greatly improved survival and outcomes. However, no large analysis of outcomes in paediatric burn patients with present treatment regimens exists. This study was designed to identify the burn size associated with significant increases in morbidity and mortality in paediatric patients. We undertook a single-centre prospective observational cohort study using clinical data for paediatric patients with burns of at least 30% of their total body surface area (TBSA). Patients were stratified by burn size in 10% increments, ranging from 30% to 100% TBSA, with a secondary assignment made according to the outcome of a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Statistical analysis was done with Student's t test, χ(2) test, logistic regression, and ROC analysis, as appropriate, with significance set at p<0·05. 952 severely burned paediatric patients were admitted to the centre between 1998 and 2008. All groups were comparable in age (mean 7·3 [SD 5·3] years, ranging from 6·1 [5·1] years in the 30-39% TBSA group to 9·6 [5·4] years in the 90-100% TBSA group) and sex distribution (628 [66%] boys, ranging from 59% [73/123] in the 60-69% TBSA group to 82% [42/51] in the 90-100% TBSA group). 123 (13%) patients died (increasing from 3% [five of 180] in the 30-39% TBSA group to 55% [28/51] in the 90-100% TBSA group; p<0·0001), 154 (16%) developed multiorgan failure (increasing from 6% [ten] in the 30-39% TBSA group to 45% [23] in the 90-100% TBSA group; p<0·0001), and 89 (9%) had sepsis (increasing from 2% [three] in the 30-39% TBSA group to 26% [13] in the 90-100% TBSA group; p<0·0001). Burn size of 62% TBSA was a crucial threshold for mortality (odds ratio 10·07, 95% CI 5·56-18·22, p<0·0001). We established that, in a modern paediatric burn care setting, a burn size of roughly 60% TBSA is a crucial threshold for postburn morbidity and mortality. On the basis of these findings, we recommend that paediatric patients with greater than 60% TBSA burns be immediately transferred to a specialised burn centre. Furthermore, at the burn centre, patients should be treated with increased vigilance and improved therapies, in view of the increased risk of poor outcome associated with this burn size. Shriners Hospitals for Children, US National Institutes of Health, US National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Institute for Translational Sciences, CFI Leaders Opportunity Fund, Physicians' Services Incorporated Foundation.

Early Withdrawal of Life Support in Severe Burn Injury

Despite many advances in modern burn care, deaths still occur in the burn intensive care unit. For patients with severe burns, providers may advocate to withdraw life support early during hospitalization when the extent of injury makes survival highly unlikely or when the patient's condition deteriorates during resuscitation. Our regional burn center has implemented a stepwise withdrawal protocol since 2001 in an effort to standardize symptoms palliation at the end of life. In this study, the authors evaluated the frequency of early withdrawal and the protocol impact on end-of-life processes of care in burn patients who died within 72 hours of hospitalization. A 13-year review of all burn patients aged ≥18 years admitted to our burn center to identify all patients who died within 72 hours of hospitalization was performed. Patients were dichotomized to the periods before (1995 to mid-2001) and after implementation of standardized withdrawal protocol (mid-2001 to 2007). Descriptive analyses were performed to compare end-of-life care processes between the two periods. A total of 4374 adult patients with acute burns were admitted during the 13-year study period, of which 252 (6%) died during hospitalization. Of the patients who died within 72 hours, 106 (84%) had withdrawal of life support compared with 20 (16%) who died with ongoing life support. Higher mean TBSA distinguished patients who died by withdrawal (61 vs 48%, P = .06). Since mid-2001, all 61 patients who had life support withdrawn were by protocol. Implementation of the protocol has led to more frequent use of opioid infusion (98 vs 87%, P = .07) and benzodiazepine infusion (95 vs 49%, P < .01), without hastening time to death (median 5.0 vs 5.5 hours, P = .70). The large majority of early burn deaths at our regional center occur via withdrawal of life support. Implementation of a protocolized withdrawal has resulted in more consistent provision of analgesia and sedation without hastening death. Burn centers should consider using a protocol for withdrawal of life support to improve consistency in end-of-life symptoms palliation.

Invited commentary on “The demographics of modern burn care: should most burns be cared for by non-burn surgeons?”

In this issue of AJS, Vercruysse et al1 report on referral and admission patterns to a regional burn center using data collected from 776 patients over the preceding 21 months to mid-2007. Similar to most other burn centers in the United States, a bimodal age distribution of young children and young to middle-aged adults made up most admissions,2 the majority being male, and the vast majority of injuries <10% of total body surface area (TBSA). Examining referral patterns, 39% of patients were seen following referral from outside institutions, 76% of these being for injuries <10% TBSA.

Use of multiple VAC devices in the management of extensive burns: The total body wrap concept

0305-4179/$36.00 # 2010 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2010.05.007 challenges in modern burn care [1–3]. The heavy fluid output overwhelm most conventional dressings resulting in contamination and increased infection rates [4]. We describe the total body wrap concept: a dressing method that employs multiple VAC (vacuum assisted closure) devices to maintain a clean moist wound environment to enhance graft take while facilitating accurate exudate charting and graft visualisation. Small sponges acting as wicks are placed in dependent areas instead of using large sponges covering the entire wound.

The demographics of modern burn care: should most burns be cared for by non-burn surgeons?

Background Minor burns represent .96% to 1.5% of emergency department visits, yet burn center referral is common. Analysis of the Grady Memorial Hospital Burn Center was conducted to examine the feasibility and savings if burns were managed locally with consultation as needed. Methods Data on 776 consecutive admissions to Grady Memorial Hospital Burn Center between November 2005 and July 2007 were prospectively reviewed. National and international cohorts were compared. Results Patients' mean age was 31 years, 69.8% were male, and 87% were insured. Thirty-nine percent were transfers. Seventy-six percent of transfers (51% of air transfers) and 70% of all admissions were for ≤10% total body surface area burns. Helicopter transport cost $12,500 and averaged 48 miles. Eighty percent of burns were hot water (scald), grease, or flame burns, and 31% required skin grafting. Conclusions Most burns require assessment, debridement, and dressing changes. Grafting is rarely necessary. Patients are transferred because of a lack of training, and patients suffer economic burden and treatment delay. Savings could be realized were patients treated locally with select burn center referral. Video consultation and mentoring can help with triage and care of minor burns. Major burns require burn center referral. International practice reinforces these results.