Assessing Hand Function Post‐Burn: A Systematic Review of Surgical vs. Enzymatic Debridement Using DASH/Quick‐DASH and MHQ Questionnaires

ABSTRACT

Hand burns, although often limited in surface area, have a major impact on function and quality of life. Debridement—surgical or enzymatic—is a key component of treatment, with enzymatic debridement increasingly used for its selectivity and potential to preserve viable dermis. To evaluate and compare the functional outcomes of hand burns treated with surgical versus enzymatic debridement, using the DASH/Quick-DASH and Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) assessment tools. A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251034408). Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science without date restrictions. Inclusion criteria focused on studies evaluating hand burn function using DASH, Quick-DASH, or MHQ after enzymatic or surgical debridement in patients aged 16 or older. Methodological quality was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Of 547 studies identified, 7 met inclusion criteria: 4 surgical and 3 enzymatic. Functional recovery was generally better in cases where enzymatic debridement preserved viable dermis and avoided grafting. DASH and MHQ scores favoured enzymatic approaches, especially when conservative management followed debridement. However, methodological limitations and clinical heterogeneity limited direct comparison. Enzymatic debridement, through preservation of viable dermis and reduced grafting need, appears associated with improved functional outcomes in hand burns. Whilst surgical debridement remains essential for deeper burns, enzymatic methods may offer functional advantages and support early rehabilitation in appropriate cases.