A review of the evidence for threshold of burn injury.

INTRODUCTION: Burn injury is common and depth is one measure of severity. Although the depth of burn injury is determined by many factors, the relationship between the temperature of the injurious agent and exposure duration, known as the time-temperature relationship, is widely accepted as one of the cornerstones of burn research. Moritz and Henriques first proposed this relationship in 1947 and their seminal work has been cited extensively. However, over the years, readers have misinterpreted their findings and incorporated misleading information about the time-temperature relationship into a wide range of industrial standards, burn prevention literature and medicolegal opinion.

AIM: The purpose of this paper is to present a critical review of the evidence that relates temperature and time to cell death and the depth of burn injury. These concepts are used by researchers, burn prevention strategists, burn care teams and child protection professionals involved in ascertaining how the mechanism of burning relates to the injury pattern and whether the injury is consistent with the history.

REVIEW METHODS: This review explores the robustness of the currently available evidence. The paper summarises the research from burn damage experimental work as well as bioheat transfer models and discusses the merits and limitations of these approaches.

REVIEW FINDINGS: There is broad agreement between in vitro and in vivo studies for superficial burns. There is clear evidence that the perception of pain in adult human skin occurs just above 43°C. When the basal layer of the epidermis reaches 44°C, burn injury occurs. For superficial dermal burns, the rate of tissue damage increases logarithmically with a linear increase in temperature. Beyond 70°C, rate of damage is so rapid that interpretation can be difficult. Depth of injury is also influenced by skin thickness, blood flow and cooling after injury. There is less clinical evidence for a time-temperature relationship for deep or subdermal burns. Bioheat transfer models are useful in research and becoming increasingly sophisticated but currently have limited practical use. Time-temperature relationships have not been established for burns in children's skin, although standards for domestic hot water suggest that the maximum temperature should be revised downward by 3-4°C to provide adequate burn protection for children.

CONCLUSION: Time-temperature relationships established for pain and superficial dermal burns in adult human skin have an extensive experimental modeling basis and reasonable clinical validation. However, time-temperature relationships for subdermal burns, full thickness burns and burn injury in children have limited clinical validation, being extrapolated from other data, and should be used with caution, particularly if presented during expert evidence.