Burn Prevention, Etiology, and Mechanism of Injury

Overview

Every burn begins with energy transfer from an external source to skin and, in deeper injuries, to subcutaneous tissue, muscle, vessels, and nerve. The energy is thermal in flame and scald injury, electrical in low- and high-voltage contact and in lightning, chemical in acid and alkali exposure, and radiant in ultraviolet and ionizing injury. The clinical consequences diverge sharply by mechanism. A flame burn distributes injury at the body surface and depth follows skin contact time and temperature. A high-voltage electrical injury distributes injury along the current path through tissues of varying resistance, producing deep damage that the cutaneous surface understates ^[10][11]. A chemical burn evolves while the agent remains in contact and continues to evolve after the patient leaves the exposure if decontamination is inadequate ^[19][20].

The clinical reality is that prevention shapes outcome more than any acute intervention. Globally, roughly 180,000 deaths per year are attributable to flame burns, and approximately 95% of those deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries ^[1]; African children carry the highest burn mortality of any pediatric population worldwide ^[3]. Prevention, when it succeeds at the population level, removes the injury entirely. When prevention fails, the next decisive interval is the first aid window. Cool running water applied for twenty minutes after a thermal burn measurably reduces injury depth progression ^[24][25]; prolonged water irrigation after chemical exposure measurably shortens hospital stay ^[27]. The clinical encounter at the burn center typically begins after both of these windows have closed. This page covers what the literature establishes about how burns happen, how the major etiologies inflict tissue injury, and which prevention and immediate-response strategies the evidence supports.

Epidemiology

The global flame-burn death toll is approximately 180,000 annually, with the burden concentrated in LMICs ^[1]. Within LMICs, children account for a disproportionately high number of burn injuries ^[1]. African children carry the highest burn mortality of any pediatric population globally ^[3].

In high-income settings, the burden is shifted toward non-fatal injury with long-tail disability. A Netherlands burden-of-disease analysis estimated 9,278 burn-related disability-adjusted life-years in 2018, with 7,385 (80%) attributable to years lived with disability and 1,892 (20%) to years of life lost; burn patients seen in general practice contributed 64% of the DALYs and deceased patients 20% ^[4]. Within that cohort, boys aged 0-4 carried the highest pediatric burden of disease (784 DALYs, 9%) and young adult women aged 18-34 carried the highest adult burden (1,319 DALYs, 14.2%) ^[4].

The relative frequency of etiologies varies by setting, season, and population. In one burn cohort, scald burns were the dominant cause (39%) followed by flame (33.6%), electrical (26.6%), and chemical (0.8%); adults aged 15 to 60 made up 55.2% of admissions, pediatric patients 43.6%, and the elderly 1.2% ^[46]. In another burn cohort, scalds accounted for 41.6%, fire 26.9%, and electricity 15.3% of injuries ^[47]. A seasonal-distribution analysis reported scald and electrical burns clustering in spring, flame burns in winter, and contact and chemical burns in summer ^[49].

Electrical injury sits within this picture as a distinct, occupation-weighted subset. A seven-year Iranian retrospective study of 726 electrical burn patients found that 95.7% were male, 89% sustained low-voltage injury, and the most affected body sites were the hands (28.6%) and upper limbs (27.8%); 12.2% required amputation ^[16]. A north-Indian tertiary-center series reported that the most common cause of electrical burns was occupational (33.3%), followed by rooftop accidents (31%); occupational electrical burns nearly doubled in proportion over a decade (18.7% to 33.3%) and rooftop electrical burns rose almost fourfold (8.2% to 31%) ^[17]. A Bangladesh national-survey comparison reported electrocution death rates of 1.7 per 100,000 in 2003 rising to 4.3 per 100,000 in 2016, with persistent rural predominance ^[18]. The rising occupational and rural signal across these series points to an unmet workforce-protection target.

Chemical burns concentrate in young, working-age adults and very young children. An eye-injury series from Colombia found that 219 eyes from 174 patients with ocular chemical burns had a mean age of 39 years, with 57.5% male, and acids as the principal causal agent ^[22]. A US emergency-department dataset identified 2,729 ED visits for chemical burns related to household and personal-care products from 2012 to 2021; among children aged 1 to 4, the most common products were laundry soaps and detergents (22.0%) and bleaches (21.3%) ^[54].

Across both high- and low-resource settings, sex distribution is skewed toward male predominance in adult burns and toward male children in the youngest age strata ^[4][16][17]. Geographic and seasonal patterns track local etiology mix and infrastructure rather than biological vulnerability.

Pathophysiology

The unifying mechanism is energy transfer at a rate exceeding tissue tolerance. The energy form differs, the rate-of-transfer thresholds differ, and the resulting tissue-injury topology differs.

Thermal mechanism and the three zones

The burn wound includes a central zone of coagulation where cell death has already occurred and a surrounding zone of stasis ^[5]. These zones are three-dimensional, and loss of tissue in the zone of stasis leads to wound deepening as well as widening ^[5]. If the zone of stasis is not reversed, the burn wound progresses ^[6]. Salvage of the zone of stasis is therefore a central target of early management ^[7].

Pre-clinical work supports active interventions to salvage the zone of stasis. In a hairless-mouse model imaged by fiber-optic confocal microscopy, cool water applied for twenty minutes immediately after burn induction significantly reduced the progressive increase in autofluorescence in deeper layers of the skin over the four-hour post-burn observation period, a marker of preserved tissue ^[68]. A subsequent porcine acute scald model showed that twenty minutes of cool running tap water produced a statistically significant improvement in burn depth compared with shorter durations or alternative treatments ^[25]. Tobalem and colleagues, however, observed that perfusion in the ischemic zone can be compromised by cold-induced vasoconstriction; warm water in their model produced an additional benefit by improving microcirculatory perfusion and increasing tissue survival, though by four days the burn depth equalized across groups ^[28]. The literature converges on the mechanistic principle that intervening at the zone of stasis matters; the choice between cool and warm first aid is contested but the routine recommendation remains cool running water at twenty minutes ^[24][25][28].

Electrical mechanism

Electrical injury produces tissue damage by multiple coexisting mechanisms. Lee, Zhang, and Hannig describe the contemporary view: Joule heating was historically considered the only cause of electrical-shock tissue injury, but permeabilization of cell membranes and direct electroconformational denaturation of macromolecules such as proteins are now recognized as additional damage modes ^[8]. Earlier work from the same group proposed that loss of cell-membrane structural integrity by electroporation is a substantial cause of tissue necrosis in victims of electrical trauma ^[9].

Sanford and Gamelli summarize the determinants of injury extent: voltage, current (amperage), type of current (alternating or direct), path of current flow across the body, duration of contact, and individual susceptibility all determine the final injury ^[10]. Tissues have different resistances to current conduction, and the amount of current that passes through a specific tissue is inversely proportional to its intrinsic resistance, with skeletal muscle disproportionately affected because of its large volume ^[11]. The typical high-voltage electrical contact injures subcutaneous fat, muscle, and bone; the upper extremities are involved in most cases because they are the contact points to the voltage source ^[10][11]. Skin adjacent to entrance and exit sites exhibits marked edema within thirty minutes of injury, and adjacent-skin perfusion changes correlate with injury severity ^[56].

Skeletal-muscle injury is the proximate driver of high-voltage electrical-burn morbidity, and recent experimental work in a rat HVEB model implicates iron-mediated mechanisms: ferrous iron content in injured skeletal muscle rises significantly twenty-four hours after injury, and damage in injured muscle can be alleviated by increasing iron storage and blocking lysosomal phagocytosis of autophagy ^[55]. Skeletal-muscle injury caused by HVEB is characterized by adjacent endangered-tissue progression after initial injury ^[55].

Low-voltage devices can still cause injury in special contexts: short-circuiting from contact with keys or coins adjacent to mobile-device batteries ^[51], and direct skin contact with small batteries such as a 9-volt cell ^[52].

Lightning mechanism

Lightning is a distinct subclass of electrical injury. Duff and McCaffrey reviewed exposure to electrical current via industrial and residential accidents and lightning strikes and characterized it as a serious and growing concern ^[12]. The acute physiologic consequences range from immediate cardiac arrhythmia ^[42] to multisystem damage; serious acute effects of electrical accidents include cardiac arrest, respiration failure, internal burns with necrosis of muscle tissue, injuries to the nerve system, and renal failure ^[69]. Although dying instantly through lightning-induced cardiac arrest is well-documented, the majority of cases in the literature describe infrequent and disparate sequelae of nervous-system involvement ^[13]. In a series of patients with electric and lightning injuries, eight had cardiac arrest after injury and ten had neurologic complaints when first evaluated ^[14].

Chemical mechanism

Walsh and colleagues describe chemical burns as injuries caused by corrosive agents (acids and alkali) leading to extensive tissue damage, and emphasize that understanding the pathophysiology and identifying the nature of the offending agent is important for effective management ^[19]. The clinical phenotype depends on the agent, and the review literature pooled here does not provide head-to-head outcome data on the depth-penetration difference between acid-driven and alkali-driven injury patterns. Hydrofluoric acid is a special case: McKee and colleagues review HF as a chemical that causes a unique chemical burn whose clinical presentation and severity vary widely, with systemic effects that make management challenging ^[20]. In a Chinese epidemiologic series of chemical burns, hydrofluoric acid and sulfuric acid were the most frequent agents involved ^[21].

Ocular chemical burns are particularly mechanism-sensitive. Schrage and colleagues demonstrated that even short rinses with phosphate-buffered saline can cause corneal calcification during treatment of ocular burns, a vision-threatening manifestation of calcium-containing-agent exposure during phosphate-buffered saline rinsing ^[23]. The rinsing fluid choice and duration matter as much as the original exposure characterization.

Inhalation co-injury mechanism

Combined smoke and burn injury is a distinct pathophysiologic state. In an animal model, burn alone in the early phase increased lung neutrophil infiltration without elevating lung water, and smoke alone increased lung water with only a mild neutrophil rise; combined smoke-and-burn injury did not increase lung neutrophil accumulation or lung water above either injury alone, but only the combined group developed a drop in cardiac output and stroke volume ^[57]. The pathophysiologic interaction between cutaneous burn and inhalation co-injury is detailed in inhalation-injury-pulmonary; the mechanism is in scope here, the management is theirs.

Classification

Burns classify on two orthogonal axes: etiology (what caused the injury) and depth/extent (how much tissue is affected and to what level).

By etiology

The canonical etiology classes are flame, scald, contact, chemical, electrical (subdivided into low-voltage, high-voltage, and lightning), and radiation. A general-burn review summarizes burns as tissue injuries caused by high temperature, chemicals, or electricity ^[47]. The relative frequency varies by setting and population: in a Chinese eight-year cohort the major causes were scalds (41.6%), fire (26.9%), and electricity (15.3%) ^[47]; in an Ethiopian cohort scalds (39%) and flame (33.6%) led, followed by electrical (26.6%) and chemical (0.8%) ^[46]. Chemical-burn substratification distinguishes acid from alkali and identifies hydrofluoric acid as a separate clinical entity ^[19][20].

By depth

Burn depth ranges from superficial (epidermis only) through partial-thickness (epidermis with variable dermal involvement) to full-thickness (extending into and through the dermis to subcutaneous tissue and below). TBSA estimates at referring institutions show low agreement with burn-centre estimates; recent work shows overestimation of percent total body surface area at referring institutions occurs in 50% or more of comparisons, with the direction of the discrepancy depending on burn depth ^[58]. Lund-Browder diagrams compared with computerized BurnCase 3D estimates differ by approximately 15% for partial-thickness burns and 11% (opposite direction) for full-thickness burns ^[59].

By context (intentional vs. accidental, occupational, etc.)

Intentional burns deserve a separate classification axis because they carry distinct prognosis. Self-inflicted burns are associated with a worse prognosis, larger burned surface area, and higher infection and death rates ^[38]. In a Brazilian meta-analysis, female sex was associated with elevated risk of attempted self-immolation (RR 4.01, 95% CI 2.9-5.5) ^[38]. A systematic review of self-immolation in the Arab world reports that self-immolators were mostly married women with low educational level and low socioeconomic status, with spikes following the 2011 Arab Spring ^[39]. Pediatric non-accidental burns (PNABs) form a separate diagnostic challenge; scald burns via forced immersion account for the majority of reported PNABs affecting both feet and hands ^[36].

Assessment

Initial assessment is etiology-specific. The general approach to burn evaluation requires a thorough evaluation of extent and depth of injury and an understanding of the pathophysiology involved ^[64]. The mechanism-specific overlay reshapes which evaluation steps carry the highest yield.

For electrical injury: cardiac monitoring is anchored to the recognition that immediate cardiac arrhythmia is one of the common consequences ^[42]. In a study of patients with acute burn injuries, 53% had ECG abnormalities — most commonly sinus tachycardia and prolonged QT interval — though no life-threatening arrhythmia was observed in that cohort and there was no correlation with extent of burn injury ^[43]. For high-voltage injury specifically, the literature places the relevant evaluation below the cutaneous surface: typical high-voltage contact injures subcutaneous fat, muscle, and bone, and adjacent-skin perfusion changes near entry and exit sites correlate with injury severity ^[10][56].

For chemical injury: prompt assessment and management is essential to reduce the deleterious effect of the compound involved ^[19]. Identification of the agent (acid vs. alkali, presence of HF), duration of contact, and adequacy of pre-hospital irrigation determine the next decision. In ocular chemical burns, the odds of low vision are about three times higher for patients without eyewash before consult (adjusted OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.3-9.4) ^[22].

For lightning: the assessment includes neurologic exam at presentation because neurologic complaints are present in a substantial proportion of survivors at first evaluation ^[14]. Delayed neurologic complications, including motor neuron disease-like spinal cord injury, have been reported after high-voltage electrical injury ^[44][45].

Management

Management within this topic is bounded to the immediate-response window: prevention interventions before injury and first aid through initial decontamination. Definitive burn care (excision, grafting, resuscitation, infection control) is treated in dedicated sibling topics.

Thermal first aid

Cool running water at the burn site is the dominant evidence-supported first-aid intervention. A systematic review of chemical-burn first aid concluded that twenty minutes of cool running water is an effective first-aid measure to improve outcomes after thermal burn, and the review suggested some evidence that early application of cool water irrigation may reduce hospital length of stay and the extent of scarring ^[24]. In a porcine acute scald model, twenty minutes of cool running tap water produced statistically significant improvement in burn depth compared with shorter durations ^[25]. The Australian and New Zealand Burn Association recommends twenty minutes of cool running tap water as burn first aid ^[25].

Knowledge gaps at the public level are substantial. In the Cool Runnings survey of mothers of young children, 94% reported they would cool a burn with water, but only 10% reported the recommended twenty-minute duration ^[26]. A general-population survey in Saudi Arabia found that more than one-third of participants reported receiving formal training in first aid and that healthcare workers were more knowledgeable than the general population about scald, flame, contact, and liquefied-petroleum-gas-cylinder burns ^[29].

Chemical decontamination

Continuous water irrigation is the first-aid intervention for chemical exposures. Chai and colleagues analyzed 1,549 chemical-burn patients and reported that in-hospital first aid reduced hospital stay by about 18% compared with patients who did not receive it, and that patients receiving pre-hospital or in-hospital first aid had 37% and 31% lower odds, respectively, of needing acute-care surgery for wound closure ^[27]. Water irrigation in this analysis was associated with shorter hospital stays and reduced acute-care surgery for wound closure without impacting intensive-care admission rates ^[27].

For ocular chemical burns the irrigating fluid matters as much as the volume. The Schrage group has shown that phosphate-buffered saline used as eye-rinsing fluid causes corneal calcification during ocular-burn treatment regardless of whether the rinse duration is 2 minutes or 15 minutes ^[23]. The recommendation from that research group is to legally restrict the formulations of phosphate-buffered saline in the medical treatment of eye burns, corneal erosions, and chemical splashes of the eye ^[23].

Prevention programs at the population level

Prevention programs have a heterogeneous track record. A systematic review of pediatric burn-prevention programs found that nine of fourteen evaluated programs reported significant reductions in burn injury rate, and five showed no effect on burn injury numbers ^[30]. A study evaluating an urban pediatric scald-burn prevention program noted that caregiver burn-prevention programs have been found to reduce the prevalence of injuries in young children, although low-income and underserved populations seldom have access to these programs ^[31]. A knowledge-attitudes-practices study of electrical-burn awareness concluded that enhancing community awareness and practices related to electrical burns is a cost-effective strategy to prevent associated morbidity and mortality, and that burn prevention programs can effectively reduce morbidity and mortality rates ^[32].

Engineering and policy interventions

Engineering-and-legislative interventions target the upstream hazard. Schulz and colleagues report that mortality associated with hot tap water scalds remains significant, owing to a lack of up-to-date regulations on tap water temperature ^[33]. Hot-tap-water scalds in their German cohort involved a significantly higher total burned surface area than other scalds (24.0% vs 15.9% in men, 21.8% vs 10.9% in women) ^[33]. Durand and colleagues studied the social-housing implementation of engineering-based scald-prevention interventions and concluded that promoters should emphasize the environmental and financial impacts of water-temperature reduction in addition to the safety benefits ^[34]. A review of prevention in developing countries reported that adequate safety legislation with policing seems to show immediate effects with multiparty involvement and statistical decreases of injury and death ^[35]. The World Health Organization has identified burn prevention as a topic in need of further investigation and education throughout the world, with increased need in low-income countries ^[60].

Occupational protective measures have an analogous engineering footprint. A firefighter-burn cohort study reported that modification and optimization of turnout gear to eliminate gaps that allow steam and hot-liquid entry may decrease burn injury ^[50].

Complications

Complication patterns track etiology.

Electrical-injury complications

Rhabdomyolysis-driven acute renal failure is the dominant systemic complication of high-voltage electrical injury. In a study of 50 burn patients with rhabdomyolysis, 15 (30%) developed acute renal failure; 9 (60%) had elevated serum creatinine on admission and 14 (93%) had CK levels above 1,250 U/L; the rise in admission serum CK was significantly increased in patients who developed acute renal failure compared with serum creatinine and urinary myoglobin (P < 0.0001) ^[41]. Bhavsar and colleagues concluded that on admission, CK is a better predictor of acute renal failure due to rhabdomyolysis than creatinine or urinary myoglobin ^[41].

Hyperkalemia is the other electrolyte concern. Navarrete reported that in electrical burns, the presence of hyperkalemia is independent of the severity of rhabdomyolysis or the extent of the burn, and that no association was found between serum potassium concentration and either %TBSA burned or the highest CPK value ^[40]. The finding suggests that surveillance cannot be triaged purely on injury severity markers, and the Navarrete data are consistent with a wider tissue-injury physiology in which serious electrolyte disturbances may emerge in electrical injury even when conventional severity indices are unremarkable ^[40][42].

Delayed neurologic complications of high-voltage and lightning injury merit dedicated follow-up. Delayed spinal cord injury is described as a relatively rare consequence of high-voltage electrical burns that nevertheless holds significant implications for quality of life ^[44]. A case of epileptic seizure as a delayed complication of high-voltage electrical brain injury has been documented in literature where such delayed seizure had previously not been reported ^[45]. A scoping review of electrical-injury rehabilitation reports that EI survivors face unique physical, neurological, and psychological challenges distinct from other burn-injury survivors, including prolonged hospital stays, delayed return to work, and higher rates of mental health issues ^[10][53]. Amputation rates after electrical injury are substantial: 12.2% of 726 electrical-burn patients in an Iranian series required amputation, with hand fingers (64 cases) the most common site ^[16]; in the Ethiopian cohort 7.9% of patients ultimately required amputation ^[46].

Chemical-injury complications

Long-term ocular complications include traumatic cataract and corneal scarring. Traumatic cataract follows lens damage from mechanical, irradiative, electrical, or chemical injury and typically presents short and unilateral with rare spontaneous resolution ^[61]. The Schrage group's work also shows that corneal calcification from phosphate-containing rinses is a foreseeable effect of phosphate-buffered-saline irrigation regardless of duration ^[23].

Lightning-injury complications

Cardiac arrest is the canonical immediate lightning complication ^[13]. Neurologic complications dominate the late-presentation literature, with the long-term consequences of lightning injuries described as infrequently occurring and enormously disparate sequelae of the nervous system ^[13][14].

Special Considerations

Pediatric burns

Children carry the largest burn-disability burden in many populations. The Netherlands DALY analysis identified boys aged 0-4 as the highest-burden pediatric subgroup ^[4]. The dominant pediatric mechanism is scald ^[46][47]. Pediatric non-accidental burns are a specific safeguarding concern: scald burns via forced immersion account for the majority of reported PNABs affecting both feet and hands, and abused children's parents were more likely to have histories of mental illness, unemployment, substance abuse, incarceration, or low annual income ^[36]. Collier and colleagues found that inflicted burns are one of the leading causes of abuse-related fatalities in children, and that prompt identification is critical to guide medical and child-welfare management given the high risk of abuse recurrence ^[37]. Gasteratos and colleagues state that all healthcare professionals should remain vigilant for subtle signs of abuse, triage patients appropriately, and report to police or social services ^[36]. Children aged 1 to 4 are disproportionately affected by household-product chemical burns ^[54]. Pediatric frostbite is also an under-recognized cause of long-term phalangeal injury, including epiphyseal cartilage destruction and growth deformity ^[62].

Occupational and industrial burns

Occupational electrical burns account for a rising share of the electrical-injury burden in several settings. In a north-Indian tertiary-center series, occupational and rooftop electrical injuries nearly doubled and quadrupled, respectively, over a decade ^[17]. A 7-year Iranian cohort reported that 95.7% of electrical-burn patients were male and 63% lacked a constant job ^[16]. Hand and upper-extremity involvement is the rule in occupational contact injury ^[16][17][30]. Chemical-burn epidemiology is similarly weighted toward working-age men, with acids as the most common ocular agent and HF and sulfuric acid prominent in industrial settings ^[21][22].

Intentional and self-inflicted burns

Self-inflicted burns are associated with larger burned surface areas, higher infection rates, and higher death rates than accidental burns ^[38]. Self-immolators in the Arab-world literature are typically married women with low educational level and low socioeconomic status; spikes have been observed during periods of regional sociopolitical upheaval ^[39].

LMIC-specific patterns

The global distribution is sharply unequal. Roughly 95% of flame-burn deaths occur in LMICs ^[1]. African children have the highest burn mortality globally ^[3]. The mechanism mix in LMICs differs from high-income settings; burns in LMICs constitute a significant unmet public-health need, with access to burn prevention, surveillance, and acute surgical care remaining limited ^[63][35]. Cross-cutting LMIC distribution and equity analysis is the scope of global-burn-burden-lmic-disparities; etiology and mechanism by setting are in scope here.

Outcomes

Mortality varies by etiology in addition to TBSA. A decade-long Malawi cohort found that the crude mortality rate in the electrical/lightning-injury group was 28% compared with 12% in the burn group (P < 0.01); on multivariate logistic regression, electrical/lightning injury conferred more than thirteen-fold higher odds of mortality than burn injuries (OR 13.3, 95% CI 7.2-24.5) ^[15]. Mortality risk in that population rose over time and TBSA contributed independently (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.1-1.1) ^[15].

Long-term functional outcomes after electrical injury are distinct from outcomes after thermal injury. Electrical-injury survivors experience prolonged hospital stays, delayed return to work, and higher rates of mental-health issues compared with other burn-injury survivors ^[53]. Amputation rates after electrical injury are clinically substantial ^[16][46].

Long-term psychiatric and neurologic morbidity also follows lightning and high-voltage injury. The literature on long-term consequences of lightning injuries is dominated by case reports of disparate nervous-system sequelae rather than systematic outcome data, reflecting a real evidence gap ^[13].

Controversies and Evidence Gaps

The evidence base for population-level prevention is mixed. Of fourteen evaluated pediatric burn-prevention programs, nine reported significant reductions in burn injury rate and five showed no effect ^[30]. Salt and colleagues conclude that RCTs to date have mostly focused on pediatric burns and most often measured knowledge change rather than injury-rate change, and that future burn-prevention interventions should measure a range of psychological constructs likely important in prevention behavior ^[65].

The cool-vs-warm first aid debate is unresolved at the mechanism level. The standard recommendation is twenty minutes of cool running water ^[24][25]. Tobalem and colleagues report that warm water delayed burn-depth progression while improving microcirculatory perfusion in a rat model, suggesting cold-induced vasoconstriction may contribute to zone-of-stasis loss ^[28]. Burn depth equalized across groups by day four in that model, so the longer-term implications remain unclear. The choice between cool and warm running water is contested in the experimental literature but the field continues to recommend cool running water in clinical guidelines ^[24][25][28].

A comprehensive overview of the burden of disease of burns for the full spectrum of care is not available globally; research has mainly focused on burn injuries treated in secondary care, leaving a gap in primary-care and out-of-hospital burden quantification ^[4][67].

The mortality-risk picture for chemical injury and the effectiveness of specific decontamination fluids remains thin in the head-to-head literature. The phosphate-buffered-saline corneal-calcification finding from the Schrage group is a single research-group signal at the publication-pattern level, although the in-vivo and in-vitro data converge in their direction ^[23]. Recommendation from that group is to legally restrict phosphate-buffered saline in eye-burn rinsing ^[23].

Tap-water-temperature regulation has population-level effects but remains uneven across jurisdictions. The Schulz cohort observation that hot-tap-water scalds carry significantly higher TBSA than other scalds underscores a preventable injury pattern ^[33]; Durand and colleagues identified social-housing engagement as a leverage point ^[34], but the evidence base on legislated maximum tap water temperatures is regional and not pooled.

References

[1] Dabek RJ, Decik M, Driscoll DN, Fuzaylov G. "Global Burn Prevention: Ukraine." J Burn Care Res 2023. PMID: 37596852. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37596852/

[2] Alruwaili A, Alsalem M, Alninyaa M, et al. "Knowledge and Practices of Public Related to Burns Management in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study." J Burn Care Res 2024. PMID: 37952110. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37952110/

[3] Purcell LN, Banda W, Williams B, Gallaher J, Charles A. "The Effect of Surgical Intervention on Pediatric Burn Injury Survival in a Resource-Poor Setting." J Surg Res 2020. PMID: 32335395. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32335395/

[4] Spronk I, van Baar ME, Verheij RA, Panneman MJ, Dokter J, Polinder S, et al. "The burden of disease of fatal and non-fatal burn injuries for the full spectrum of care in the Netherlands." Arch Public Health 2023. PMID: 36617544. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36617544/

[5] Hettiaratchy S, Dziewulski P. "ABC of burns: pathophysiology and types of burns." BMJ 2004. PMID: 15191982. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15191982/

[6] Haslik W, Kamolz LP, Andel H, Meissl G, Frey M. "The use of subatmospheric pressure to prevent burn wound progression: first experiences in burn wound treatment." Zentralbl Chir 2004. PMID: 15168290. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15168290/

[7] Saputro I, Riestiano B, Hoekstra LT, Zarasade L. "The effect of oral N-acetylcystein on prevention of extensive tissue destruction in electrical burn injury." Burns 2018. PMID: 30274809. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30274809/

[8] Lee RC, Zhang D, Hannig J. "Biophysical injury mechanisms in electrical shock trauma." Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2000. PMID: 11701521. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11701521/

[9] Lee RC, Hannig J, Matthews KL, Myerov A, Chen CT. "Pharmaceutical therapies for sealing of permeabilized cell membranes in electrical injuries." Ann N Y Acad Sci 1999. PMID: 10842638. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10842638/

[10] Sanford A, Gamelli RL. "Lightning and thermal injuries." Handb Clin Neurol 2014. PMID: 24365365. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24365365/

[11] Lee DH, Desai MJ, Gauger EM. "Electrical Injuries of the Hand and Upper Extremity." J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2019. PMID: 30278017. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30278017/

[12] Duff K, McCaffrey RJ. "Electrical injury and lightning injury: a review of their mechanisms and neuropsychological, psychiatric, and neurological sequelae." Neuropsychol Rev 2001. PMID: 11572471. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11572471/

[13] Muehlberger T, Vogt PM, Munster AM. "The long-term consequences of lightning injuries." Burns 2001. PMID: 11718985. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11718985/

[14] Janus TJ, Barrash J. "Neurologic and neurobehavioral effects of electric and lightning injuries." J Burn Care Rehabil 1996. PMID: 8889864. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8889864/

[15] An SJ, Kayange L, Davis D, Peiffer S, Gallaher J, Charles A. "Predictors of mortality following electrical and lightning injuries in Malawi: A decade of experience." Burns 2024. PMID: 37945505. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37945505/

[16] Vaghardoost R, Saraee A, Ghavami Y, Sobouti B. "Evaluation of Electrical Burn Injuries in Iran: A 7-Year Retrospective Study." J Burn Care Res 2022. PMID: 33886962. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33886962/

[17] Arumugam PK, Thakur P, Sarabahi S. "Changing Trends In Electrical Burns From A Tertiary Care Centre - Epidemiology And Outcome Analysis." Ann Burns Fire Disasters 2021. PMID: 35035329. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35035329/

[18] Shawon RA, Ferdoush J, Ali AH, Biswas A, Rahman AKMF, Mashreky SR. "Alarming rise in fatal electrocutions in Bangladesh: Comparison of two national surveys." Burns 2019. PMID: 31176505. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31176505/

[19] Walsh K, Hughes I, Dheansa B. "Management of chemical burns." Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 2022. PMID: 35377199. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35377199/

[20] McKee D, Thoma A, Bailey K, Fish J. "A review of hydrofluoric acid burn management." Plast Surg (Oakv) 2014. PMID: 25114621. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25114621/

[21] Zhang YH, Han CM, Chen GX, Ye CJ, Jiang RM, Liu LP, et al. "Factors associated with chemical burns in Zhejiang province, China: an epidemiological study." BMC Public Health 2011. PMID: 21958110. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21958110/

[22] Robayo-Velásquez JF, Bonilla-Escobar FJ, Salamanca O, Martínez-Blanco AM. "Ocular Chemical Burns: Epidemiological Trends in a Colombian Medical Center." J Burn Care Res 2024. PMID: 38367189. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38367189/

[23] Schrage NF, Abu SS, Hermanns L, Panfil C, Dutescu RM. "Irrigation with phosphate-buffered saline causes corneal calcification during treatment of ocular burns." Burns 2019. PMID: 31629617. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31629617/

[24] Chai H, Chaudhari N, Kornhaber R, Cuttle L, Fear M, Wood F, et al. "Chemical burn to the skin: A systematic review of first aid impacts on clinical outcomes." Burns 2022. PMID: 35662479. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35662479/

[25] Bartlett N, Yuan J, Holland AJ, et al. "Optimal duration of cooling for an acute scald contact burn injury in a porcine model." J Burn Care Res 2008. PMID: 18695595. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18695595/

[26] Burgess JD, Watt KA, Kimble RM, Cameron CM. "Knowledge of childhood burn risks and burn first aid: Cool Runnings." Inj Prev 2019. PMID: 29386371. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29386371/

[27] Chai H, Martin L, Kornhaber R, Cuttle L, Fear M, Wood F. "Cutaneous Chemical Burns: Water Irrigation First Aid Improves Short-term Outcomes." J Burn Care Res 2025. PMID: 40346815. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40346815/

[28] Tobalem M, Harder Y, Tschanz E, Speidel V, Pittet-Cuénod B, Wettstein R. "First-aid with warm water delays burn progression and increases skin survival." J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013. PMID: 23059135. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23059135/

[29] Alshiakh SM, Algarni AS, Doman G, Aalam A, Alabbadi RH. "First aid knowledge for burn injuries among healthcare workers and the general population in Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study." Burns 2025. PMID: 40267827. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40267827/

[30] van Balen NIM, Simon MH, Botman M, Bloemers FW, Schoonmade LJ, Meij-de Vries A. "Effectiveness of prevention programmes on the rate of burn injuries in children: a systematic review." Inj Prev 2024. PMID: 38050048. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38050048/

[31] Thompson R, Budziszewski R, Nanassy AD, Meyer LK, Glat P, Burkey B. "Evaluating an urban pediatric hospital's scald burn prevention program." Inj Epidemiol 2021. PMID: 34517902. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34517902/

[32] AlQhtani AZ, Al-Swedan NH, Alkhunani TA, et al. "Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Electrical Burns." J Burn Care Res 2024. PMID: 37962554. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37962554/

[33] Schulz A, Grigutsch D, Alischahi A, Perbix W, Daniels M, Fuchs PC, et al. "Comparison of the characteristics of hot tap water scalds and other scalds in Germany." Burns 2020. PMID: 31679795. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31679795/

[34] Durand MA, Green J, Edwards P, Milton S, Lutchmun S. "Perceptions of tap water temperatures, scald risk and prevention among parents and older people in social housing: a qualitative study." Burns 2012. PMID: 22100424. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22100424/

[35] Van der Merwe AE, Steenkamp WC. "Prevention of burns in developing countries." Ann Burns Fire Disasters 2012. PMID: 23766751. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23766751/

[36] Gasteratos K, McCarthy M, Chatziathanasiou D, et al. "A Systematic Review of Pediatric Nonaccidental Burns: Protecting the Children Through Knowledge, Vigilance, and Prevention." Ann Plast Surg 2023. PMID: 37157138. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37157138/

[37] Collier ZJ, Ramaiah V, Glick JC, Gottlieb LJ. "A 6-Year Case-Control Study of the Presentation and Clinical Sequelae for Noninflicted, Negligent, and Inflicted Pediatric Burns." J Burn Care Res 2017. PMID: 28009699. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28009699/

[38] Nascimento JHFD, Souza Filho BM, Tomaz SC, et al. "Self-inflicted burns in Brazil: systematic review and meta-analysis." Rev Col Bras Cir 2024. PMID: 38716915. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38716915/

[39] El Hayek S, Cherro M, El Harake N, Ghossoub E. "Self-immolation in the Arab world: A systematic review." Burns 2023. PMID: 37129972. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37129972/

[40] Navarrete N. "Hyperkalemia in electrical burns: A retrospective study in Colombia." Burns 2018. PMID: 29395406. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29395406/

[41] Bhavsar P, Rathod KJ, Rathod D, Chamania CS. "Utility of Serum Creatinine, Creatine Kinase and Urinary Myoglobin in Detecting Acute Renal Failure due to Rhabdomyolysis in Traumatic Burn Patients." Indian J Surg 2013. PMID: 24426377. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24426377/

[42] Chuang SS, Yu CC. "Delayed obturator artery rupture: a complication of high-voltage electrical injury." Burns 2003. PMID: 12781622. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12781622/

[43] Iyah GR, Reddy PC, El-Amin O, Caldito GC. "Electrocardiographic abnormalities in patients with acute burn injuries." The Journal of the Louisiana State Medical Society : official organ of the Louisiana State Medical Society 2008. PMID: 18669408. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18669408/

[44] Chakka K, Clark A, Kowalske K. "We Got Your Back: Evaluating Recovery Following Spinal Cord Injury After High-Voltage Electric Burns." J Burn Care Res 2023. PMID: 36001001. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36001001/

[45] Kuwabara T, Fukushima T, Makino K, Kondo H. "Epileptic seizure, cataract, and tongue atrophy during the 8 years after electrical brain injury." Intern Med 2009. PMID: 19571455. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19571455/

[46] Mulatu D, Zewdie A, Zemede B, Terefe B, Liyew B. "Outcome of burn injury and associated factor among patient visited at Addis Ababa burn, emergency and trauma hospital." BMC Emerg Med 2022. PMID: 36494642. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36494642/

[47] Zheng Y, Lin G, Zhan R, Qian W, Yan T, Sun L, et al. "Epidemiological analysis of 9,779 burn patients in China: An eight-year retrospective study at a major burn center in southwest China." Exp Ther Med 2019. PMID: 30930977. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30930977/

[49] Taş I, Yiğit E. "Profile of patients with burns according to seasonal changes." J Wound Care 2023. PMID: 37830804. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37830804/

[50] Kahn SA, Patel JH, Lentz CW, Bell DE. "Firefighter burn injuries: predictable patterns influenced by turnout gear." J Burn Care Res 2012. PMID: 21979850. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21979850/

[51] Mankowski PJ, Kanevsky J, Bakirtzian P, Cugno S. "Cellular phone collateral damage: A review of burns associated with lithium battery powered mobile devices." Burns 2016. PMID: 26847612. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26847612/

[52] Whitelock C, Echternacht S, Ahmad A, Habina M, Kia M. "Suspected Burn From a 9-Voltage Battery." J Burn Care Res 2024. PMID: 38006581. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38006581/

[53] Zahir S, Hitzig S, Munce S, Shiers J, Godleski M, Wasilewski M. "Rehabilitation of adult electrical injury survivors: A scoping review." Burns 2025. PMID: 40580902. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40580902/

[54] Oulee A, Waldrop I, Mendoza R, Onyekonwu C, Plurad DS, Sheets NW. "Children ages one to four are disproportionally affected by chemical burns: NEISS cross-sectional analysis." Burns 2023. PMID: 37003848. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37003848/

[55] Hao J, Lu M, Zhao X, Li C, Ge C, Zhang J, et al. "Exploring the underlying mechanism by transcriptome sequencing in rats with high-voltage electrical burns and the role of cuproptosis." Burns 2024. PMID: 39368958. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39368958/

[56] Shupp JW, Moffatt LT, Nguyen T, Ramella-Roman JC, Hammamieh R, Miller SA, et al. "Examination of local and systemic in vivo responses to electrical injury using an electrical burn delivery system." J Burn Care Res 2012. PMID: 22079918. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22079918/

[57] Quinn DA, Moufarrej R, Volokhov A, Syrkina O, Hales CA. "Combined smoke inhalation and scald burn in the rat." J Burn Care Rehabil 2003. PMID: 14501414. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14501414/

[58] Brekke RL, Almeland SK, Hufthammer KO, Hansson E. "Agreement of clinical assessment of burn size and burn depth between referring hospitals and burn centres: A systematic review." Burns 2023. PMID: 35843804. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35843804/

[59] Benjamin NC, Lee JO, Norbury WB, et al. "Accuracy of Currently Used Paper Burn Diagram vs a Three-Dimensional Computerized Model." J Burn Care Res 2017. PMID: 27294858. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27294858/

[60] Gamelli L, Mykychack I, Kushnir A, Driscoll DN, Fuzaylov G. "Targeting burn prevention in Ukraine: evaluation of base knowledge in burn prevention and first aid treatment." J Burn Care Res 2015. PMID: 25055008. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25055008/

[61] Moreschi C, Da Broi U, Lanzetta P. "Medico-legal implications of traumatic cataract." J Forensic Leg Med 2013. PMID: 23357390. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23357390/

[62] Ma SL, Baldwin C, Rapolti ME. "Accelerated Frostbite-induced Acroosteolysis in Pediatric Insensate Hand: A Case Report and Literature Review." J Burn Care Res 2025. PMID: 39435769. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39435769/

[63] Stokes MAR, Johnson WD. "Burns in the Third World: an unmet need." Ann Burns Fire Disasters 2017. PMID: 29983673. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29983673/

[64] Moncrief JA. "Burns. I. Assessment." JAMA 1979. PMID: 448871. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/448871/

[65] Salt C, Shepherd L, Cooke R, Hurst G. "Do burn injury prevention interventions change what people know and how people think? A systematic review investigating burn injury prevention." Burns 2025. PMID: 40319831. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40319831/

[67] van Zoonen EE, van Baar ME, van Schie CHM, Koppes LLJ, Verheij RA. "Burn injuries in primary care in the Netherlands: Risk factors and trends." Burns 2022. PMID: 34167851. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34167851/

[68] Vo LT, Anikijenko P, McLaren WJ, Delaney PM, Barkla DH, King RG. "Autofluorescence of skin burns detected by fiber-optic confocal imaging: evidence that cool water treatment limits progressive thermal damage in anesthetized hairless mice." J Trauma 2001. PMID: 11468475. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11468475/

[69] Veiersted KB, Goffeng LO, Moian R, Remo E, Solli A, Erikssen J. "[Acute and chronic injuries after electrical accidents]." Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2003. PMID: 14593890. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14593890/