Cargando…

A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chang, Angela Christine, Dearman, Bronwyn, Greenwood, John Edward
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Open Science Company, LLC 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3080766/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21559060
_version_ 1782202135763484672
author Chang, Angela Christine
Dearman, Bronwyn
Greenwood, John Edward
author_facet Chang, Angela Christine
Dearman, Bronwyn
Greenwood, John Edward
author_sort Chang, Angela Christine
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Text
id pubmed-3080766
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Open Science Company, LLC
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30807662011-05-10 A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography Chang, Angela Christine Dearman, Bronwyn Greenwood, John Edward Eplasty Journal Article 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. Open Science Company, LLC 2011-04-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3080766/ /pubmed/21559060 Text en Copyright © 2011 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ 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.
spellingShingle Journal Article
Chang, Angela Christine
Dearman, Bronwyn
Greenwood, John Edward
A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography
title A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography
title_full A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography
title_fullStr A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography
title_short A Comparison of Wound Area Measurement Techniques: Visitrak Versus Photography
title_sort comparison of wound area measurement techniques: visitrak versus photography
topic Journal Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3080766/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21559060
work_keys_str_mv AT changangelachristine acomparisonofwoundareameasurementtechniquesvisitrakversusphotography
AT dearmanbronwyn acomparisonofwoundareameasurementtechniquesvisitrakversusphotography
AT greenwoodjohnedward acomparisonofwoundareameasurementtechniquesvisitrakversusphotography
AT changangelachristine comparisonofwoundareameasurementtechniquesvisitrakversusphotography
AT dearmanbronwyn comparisonofwoundareameasurementtechniquesvisitrakversusphotography
AT greenwoodjohnedward comparisonofwoundareameasurementtechniquesvisitrakversusphotography