Scar treatment response review

Scar Treatment Response Review

Description

Use this skill to summarize scar or keloid response after injections, devices, surgery, radiotherapy, conservative care, or combination treatment. It creates clinician-reviewable response briefs and candidate outcome.csv fields. It does not decide treatment efficacy, recurrence, or next therapy.

When to Use

• A lesion has at least one baseline and one follow-up record.
• A clinician needs a response summary across symptoms, images, and treatment exposure.
• A registry needs conservative response categories and confidence notes.
• A case has mixed signals, such as improved itch but persistent elevation.

Do Not Use

• Do not recommend future treatment.
• Do not label recurrence without clinician review.
• Do not compare cases with inadequate follow-up or poor-quality photos without clear limitations.
• Do not ignore adverse events or red flags.

Required Inputs

• Baseline and follow-up visit summaries.
• Treatment exposure records.
• Photo quality notes when images are used.
• Patient-reported pain, itch, satisfaction, and function when available.
• Any validated scar scale scores.

Workflow

1. Confirm patient safety and whether urgent concerns need escalation.
2. Summarize treatment exposure:
   • modality
   • timing
   • combination status
   • adverse events
3. Summarize response domains:
   • symptoms
   • lesion appearance
   • scale scores
   • function
   • cosmetic concern
4. Separate patient-reported improvement from clinician-observed change.
5. Check image comparability before using visual change as evidence.
6. Assign a candidate response_category only with confidence language.
7. Draft recurrence_status as not_assessed, suspected, yes, or no only when the source supports it.
8. Produce clinician-review questions and missing data.

Output Format

• Treatment exposure summary
• Response by domain
• Adverse events and red flags
• Image comparability note
• Candidate outcome.csv row draft
• Outcome confidence and rationale
• Clinician-review questions

Outcome Rules

• Prefer uncertain when documentation conflicts.
• Prefer not_assessable when follow-up or image quality is inadequate.
• Use improved only when at least one meaningful domain improves and no major worsening is documented.
• Use stable when the record supports no meaningful change.
• Use worse for progression that is not clearly recurrence.
• Use recurrence or partial_recurrence only when explicitly documented or clinician-reviewed.

Safety and Compliance

This skill supports documentation, research preparation, and clinician review. It does not diagnose, prescribe, determine recurrence, or replace licensed clinical judgment. Escalate urgent symptoms, suspected infection, wound breakdown, severe pain, rapid progression, bleeding, ulceration, or functional compromise to a qualified clinician.

Examples

Review this day-90 follow-up after one steroid injection and draft a conservative OpenScar treatment response summary.

Integration

Works well with keloid-follow-up-intake, before-after-scar-analysis, scar-image-quality-review, and scar-registry-entry-builder.