AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: 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. DESIGN: A descriptive correlational study. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results, VISITRAK was found to have high intra- and inter-rater reliability and high validity. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: 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.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: 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. DESIGN: A descriptive correlational study. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results, VISITRAK was found to have high intra- and inter-rater reliability and high validity. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: 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.
Authors: José I Fernández-Montequín; Carmen M Valenzuela-Silva; Odalys González Díaz; William Savigne; Natasha Sancho-Soutelo; Fidel Rivero-Fernández; Pablo Sánchez-Penton; Lourdes Morejón-Vega; Heriberto Artaza-Sanz; Arístides García-Herrera; Cecilio González-Benavides; Carlos M Hernández-Cañete; Alberto Vázquez-Proenza; Jorge Berlanga-Acosta; Pedro A López-Saura Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Guilherme Pena; Beatrice Kuang; Zygmunt Szpak; Prue Cowled; Joseph Dawson; Robert Fitridge Journal: Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) Date: 2019-10-23 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Maxim Privalov; Nils Beisemann; Jan El Barbari; Eric Mandelka; Michael Müller; Hannah Syrek; Paul Alfred Grützner; Sven Yves Vetter Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 4.903
Authors: Carmen M Valenzuela-Silva; Ángela D Tuero-Iglesias; Elizeth García-Iglesias; Odalys González-Díaz; Amaurys Del Río-Martín; Isis Belkis Yera Alos; José I Fernández-Montequín; Pedro A López-Saura Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-09-10 Impact factor: 19.112