Literature DB >> 18388577

Quantitative measurement of hypertrophic scar: intrarater reliability, sensitivity, and specificity.

Bernadette Nedelec1, José A Correa, Grazyna Rachelska, Alexis Armour, Léo LaSalle.   

Abstract

The comparison of scar evaluation over time requires measurement tools with acceptable intrarater reliability and the ability to discriminate skin characteristics of interest. The objective of this study was to evaluate the intrarater reliability and sensitivity and specificity of the Cutometer, the Mexameter, and the DermaScan C relative to the modified Vancouver Scar Scale (mVSS) in patient-matched normal skin, normal scar (donor sites), and hypertrophic scar (HSc). A single investigator evaluated four tissue types (severe HSc, less severe HSc, donor site, and normal skin) in 30 burn survivors with all four measurement tools. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the Cutometer was acceptable (> or =0.75) for the maximum deformation measure for the donor site and normal skin (>0.78) but was below the acceptable range for the HSc sites and all other parameters. The ICC for the Mexameter erythema (>0.75) and melanin index (>0.89) and the DermaScan C total thickness measurement (>0.82) were acceptable for all sites. The ICC for the total of the height, pliability, and vascularity subscales of the mVSS was acceptable (0.81) for normal scar but below the acceptable range for the scar sites. The DermaScan C was clearly able to discriminate HSc from normal scar and normal skin based on the total thickness measure. The Cutometer was less discriminating but was still able to discriminate HSc from normal scar and normal skin. The Mexameter erythema index was not a good discriminator of HSc and normal scar. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to establish the best cutoff point for the DermaScan C total thickness and the Cutometer maximum deformation, which were 2.034 and 0.387 mm, respectively. This study showed that although the Cutometer, the DermaScan C, and the Mexameter have measurement properties that make them attractive substitutes for the mVSS, caution must be used when interpreting results since the Cutometer has a ceiling effect when measuring rigid tissue such as HSc and the Mexameter erythema index does not discriminate normal scar from HSc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18388577     DOI: 10.1097/BCR.0b013e3181710869

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Burn Care Res        ISSN: 1559-047X            Impact factor:   1.845


  20 in total

1.  An intra-individual surgical wound comparison shows that octenidine-based hydrogel wound dressing ameliorates scar appearance following abdominoplasty.

Authors:  Johannes Matiasek; Philip Kienzl; Lukas W Unger; Christoph Grill; Rupert Koller; Bela R Turk
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 2.  The validity and reliability of using ultrasound elastography to measure cutaneous stiffness, a systematic review.

Authors:  Helen M DeJong; Steven Abbott; Marilyn Zelesco; Brendan F Kennedy; Mel R Ziman; Fiona M Wood
Journal:  Int J Burns Trauma       Date:  2017-12-20

3.  What score on the Vancouver Scar Scale constitutes a hypertrophic scar? Results from a survey of North American burn-care providers.

Authors:  Callie M Thompson; Ravi F Sood; Shari Honari; Gretchen J Carrougher; Nicole S Gibran
Journal:  Burns       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 2.744

4.  Rapid enzymatic burn debridement: A review of the paediatric clinical trial experience.

Authors:  Yaron Shoham; Yuval Krieger; Guy Rubin; Ingo Koenigs; Bernd Hartmann; Frank Sander; Alexandra Schulz; Keren David; Lior Rosenberg; Eldad Silberstein
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-05-22       Impact factor: 3.315

5.  Skin viscoelasticity: physiologic mechanisms, measurement issues, and application to nursing science.

Authors:  Janine S Everett; Marilyn S Sommers
Journal:  Biol Res Nurs       Date:  2012-04-28       Impact factor: 2.522

6.  Standardizing Dimensionless Cutometer Parameters to Determine In Vivo Elasticity of Human Skin.

Authors:  Darren B Abbas; Christopher V Lavin; Evan J Fahy; Michelle Griffin; Nicholas Guardino; Megan King; Kellen Chen; P Hermann Lorenz; Geoffrey C Gurtner; Michael T Longaker; Arash Momeni; Derrick C Wan
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2021-10-08       Impact factor: 4.730

7.  Assessing diagnostic tests: how to correct for the combined effects of interpretation and reference standard.

Authors:  Ahmet Omurtag; Andre A Fenton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The Shear Wave Velocity on Elastography Correlates with the Clinical Symptoms and Histopathological Features of Keloids.

Authors:  Rino Aya; Satoko Yamawaki; Katsuhiro Yoshikawa; Yasuhiro Katayama; Tatsuki Enoshiri; Motoko Naitoh; Shigehiko Suzuki
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2015-08-10

9.  The effect of topically applied tissue expanders on radial forearm skin pliability: a prospective self-controlled study.

Authors:  Jeffson Chung; James P Bonaparte; Michael Odell; Martin Corsten
Journal:  J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2014-04-16

10.  Ultrasound elastography to evaluate keloids.

Authors:  Rino Aya; Satoko Yamawaki; Gan Muneuchi; Motoko Naitoh; Shigehiko Suzuki
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2014-03-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.