Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 326

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Phenomenon of “Fluid Creep” in Acute Burn Resuscitation

Saffle, Jeffrey R.·2007·Journal of Burn Care & Research

Abstract

Several reports have documented that modern burn patients receive far more resuscitation fluid than predicted by the Parkland formula-a phenomenon termed "fluid creep." This article reviews the incidence, consequences, and possible etiologies of fluid creep in modern practice and uses this information to propose some therapeutic strategies to reduce or eliminate excessive fluid resuscitation in burn care. A literature review was performed of historical references that form the foundation of modern fluid resuscitation, as well as reports of fluid creep and its consequences. The original Parkland formula required a 24-hour volume of 4 ml/kg/%TBSA lactated Ringer's solution followed by an infusion of 0.3-0.5 ml/kg/ %TBSA plasma. Modern iterations of this formula have omitted the colloid bolus. Numerous exceptions to the formula have been noted, most consistently patients with inhalation injuries. In contrast, recent reports document greatly increased fluid requirements in unselected patients, which seems to consist largely of progressive edema formation in unburned areas, increasing after the first 8 hours post-burn. This has been linked to occurrence of the abdominal compartment syndrome and other serious complications. Strategies to reduce fluid creep include the avoidance of early overresuscitation, use of colloid as a routine component of resuscitation or for "rescue," and adherence to protocols for fluid resuscitation. Fluid creep is a significant problem in modern burn care. Review of original investigations of burn shock, coupled with modern reports of fluid creep, suggests several mechanisms by which this problem can be controlled. Prospective trials of these therapies are needed to confirm their effectiveness.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/bcr.0b013e318053d3a1

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Cited by

See all 326

Metadata

Authors
Saffle, J. R.
Venue
Journal of Burn Care & Research
Published
2007-05
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
382-395
ISSN
1559-047X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2053669818
Cited by
326
References
56
FWCI
10.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Phenomenon of “Fluid Creep” in Acute Burn Resuscitation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/bcr.0b013e318053d3a1
The paper
Saffle, J. R. (2007). The Phenomenon of “Fluid Creep” in Acute Burn Resuscitation. Journal of Burn Care & Research. https://doi.org/10.1097/bcr.0b013e318053d3a1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.