23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography

      research-article
      a , , BSc (Hons) b , , AM, BSc (Hons), MBChB, MD, FRCS (Eng), FRCS (Plast), FRACS b
      Eplasty
      Open Science Company, LLC

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective: To investigate whether a cheap, fast, easy, and widely available photographic method is an accurate alternative to Visitrak when measuring wound area in cases where a non–wound-contact method is desirable. Methods: The areas of 40 surgically created wounds on porcine models were measured using 2 techniques—Visitrak and photography combined with ImageJ. The wounds were photographed with a ruler included in the photographic frame to allow ImageJ calibration. The images were uploaded to a computer and opened with ImageJ. The wound outline was defined from the photographic image using a digital pad, and the ImageJ software calculated the wound area. The Visitrak method involved a 2-layered transparent Visitrak film placed on the wound and the outline traced onto the film. The top layer containing the tracing was retraced onto the Visitrak digital pad using the Visitrak pen and the software calculated the wound area. Results: The average wound area using the photographic method was 52.264 cm 2 and using Visitrak was 51.703 cm 2. The mean difference in wound area was 0.560 cm 2. Using a 2-tailed paired T test, the T statistic was 1.285 and the value .206, indicating no statistical difference between the two methods. The interclass correlation coefficient was 0.971. Conclusions: The photographic method is an accurate alternative to Visitrak for measuring wound area, with no statistical difference in wound area measurement demonstrated during this study. The photographic method is a more appropriate technique for clean and uncontaminated wounds, as contact with the wound bed is avoided.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Wound measurement: can it help us to monitor progression to healing?

          Wound measurement can help practitioners to monitor the progression to healing. The most effective way of doing this is to calculate the percentage reduction of wound area over time, particularly within the first four weeks.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Standardization of wound photography using the Wound Electronic Medical Record.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A study of the efficiency and convenience of an advanced portable Wound Measurement System (VISITRAK).

              A reduction of pressure ulcer wound area is one of the most important indicators of wound healing. A wound measurement system (VISITRAK), which calculates the area based on simple tracings of wounds, has been developed as a practical tool for assessing wound area at the bedside. However, its accuracy has remained to be clarified in a clinical setting. This study aimed to clarify the clinical accuracy of the VISITRAK system. A descriptive correlational study. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of wound measuring techniques were calculated using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) from 10 pressure ulcers. Concurrent validity was assessed, using 30 pressure ulcers, by comparing VISITRAK and digital planimetry. Assessment times for VISITRAK and digital planimetry were also compared for clinical practicality. The VISITRAK reliability results showed high (0.99) ICC values. For validity, a correlation coefficient between VISITRAK and digital planimetry was 0.99. The median time to take a measurement with VISITRAK was significantly shorter than that required for digital planimetry. Based on our results, VISITRAK was found to have high intra- and inter-rater reliability and high validity. The short measurement time with the VISITRAK system, and the ability to use it at the bedside, make it a useful, convenient device for clinical use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eplasty
                ePlasty
                Eplasty
                Open Science Company, LLC
                1937-5719
                2011
                18 April 2011
                : 11
                : e18
                Affiliations
                [1] aSchool of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia
                [2] bAdult Burn Centre, Royal Adelaide Hospital and Skin Engineering Laboratory, Hanson Institute, Adelaide, South Australia
                Author notes
                Article
                18
                3080766
                21559060
                9109a145-4f3b-4844-88b8-89837c3ff0d0
                Copyright © 2011 The Author(s)

                This is an open-access article whereby the authors retain copyright of the work. The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Journal Article

                Surgery
                Surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article