Publication:
Efficacy of Reusable Rubber Moulage on Mannequin Versus Conventional Method for Burn Size Estimation

dc.contributor.authorTummaporn Danpukdee
dc.contributor.authorNatsinee Athinartrattanapong
dc.contributor.authorPhanorn Chalermdamrichai
dc.contributor.authorRatree Seesook
dc.contributor.authorChomalee Kasiban
dc.contributor.authorWarapong Poonsawat
dc.contributor.authorVeerachai Kaobanmai
dc.contributor.authorธรรมพร ด่านภักดี
dc.contributor.authorณัฐสินี อธินาถรัตนพงศ์
dc.contributor.authorพรรณอร เฉลิมดำริชัย
dc.contributor.authorราตรี สีสุข
dc.contributor.authorช่อมาลี กสิบาล
dc.contributor.authorวรพงษ์ พูลสวัสดิ์
dc.contributor.authorวีระชัย เก่าบ้านใหม่
dc.date.accessioned2025-04-30T03:45:16Z
dc.date.available2025-04-30T03:45:16Z
dc.date.created2025-04-30
dc.date.issued2024
dc.description.abstractBackground: Burn size estimation is crucial to burn fluid resuscitation. Therefore, training and practice to improve the accuracy of burn size estimation is important. Using reusable rubber moulage (RRM), the newly developed equipment to cooperating with simulation might help improve the accuracy of burn size estimation compared to conventional picture illustration. Objectives: To compare the accuracy of burn size estimation in simulation between picture illustration and RRM application, and to validate the face and content validity of RRM. Methods: Medical students, ER residents, EP staff, and paramedics were recruited and randomized into 2 groups. Each group completed 2 different burn pattern stations consisting of one RRM-decorated mannequin station and one picture illustration station. The estimation of total body surface area (TBSA) percentage was statistically analyzed to determine the difference between the 2 methods. Face and content validation were analyzed by a Likert scale. Results: A total of 70 participants were recruited. The means of total %TBSA of pattern 1 from RRM and picture illustration were 42.29% and 41.24% (P = .61), respectively. The means of pattern 2%TBSA estimation were 41.24% and 42.65% (P = .34), respectively. Participants rated RRM quality by Likert scale with means score more than 4 out of 5 in all questions. Written comments showed a preference toward RRM. Conclusions: There were no significant %TBSA differences between RRM decorated mannequin and picture illustration in terms of %TBSA. However, participants were satisfied with RRM quality and preferred RRM decorated mannequin.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.citationRamathibodi Medical Journal. Vol. 47, No. 2 (Apr - Jun 2024), 12-20
dc.identifier.issn0125-3611 (Print)
dc.identifier.issn2651-0561 (Online)
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/109834
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsผลงานนี้เป็นลิขสิทธิ์ของมหาวิทยาลัยมหิดล ขอสงวนไว้สำหรับเพื่อการศึกษาเท่านั้น ต้องอ้างอิงแหล่งที่มา ห้ามดัดแปลงเนื้อหา และห้ามนำไปใช้เพื่อการค้า
dc.rights.holderDepartment of Emergency Medicine Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital Mahidol University
dc.rights.holderRubber Industry Division Rubber Authority of Thailand
dc.subjectMoulage
dc.subjectBurn estimation
dc.subjectEmergency medicine
dc.subjectแบบจำลองแผลไฟไหม้
dc.subjectการประเมินขนาดแผลไฟไหม้
dc.subjectเวชศาสตร์ฉุกเฉิน
dc.titleEfficacy of Reusable Rubber Moulage on Mannequin Versus Conventional Method for Burn Size Estimation
dc.title.alternativeประสิทธิภาพการฝึกประเมินขนาดแผลไฟไหม้โดยใช้แบบแผลไฟไหม้จำลองจากยางพาราเทียบกับการประเมินขนาดแผลไฟไหม้จากรูปภาพ
dc.typeOriginal Article
dcterms.accessRightsopen access
dspace.entity.typePublication
mods.location.urlhttps://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/ramajournal/article/view/266672/183159
oaire.citation.endPage20
oaire.citation.issue2
oaire.citation.startPage12
oaire.citation.titleRamathibodi Medical Journal
oaire.citation.volume47
oaire.versionAccepted Manuscript
oairecerif.author.affiliationMahidol University. Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital. Department of Emergency Medicine
oairecerif.author.affiliationRubber Authority of Thailand. Rubber Industry Division

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
ra-ar-tummapor-2024.pdf
Size:
3.49 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections