AIM: The present study assesses precision and accuracy of four selected methods of wound area measurements in diabetic foot wounds. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The areas of 16 wound shapes were measured using linear measurement with elliptical estimation (Elliptical method), using the Visitrak™ (Smith & Nephew, London, United Kingdom) device, the SilhouetteMobile™ device (ARANZ Medical Ltd., Christchurch, New Zealand), and the TeleDiaFoS system (Nalecz Institute of Biocybernetics and Biomedical Engineering, Warsaw, Poland). The actual area of a wound shape was determined with a tested scanner and specifically developed software. Accuracy of the area measurement method was assessed by the relative error (RE), whereas precision was assessed by the coefficient of variation (CV). RESULTS: The overall absolute REs were 13.3%, 6.8%, 2.1%, and 2.3% for the Elliptical method, the Visitrak device, the TeleDiaFoS system, and the SilhouetteMobile device, respectively. The accuracy of the Visitrak device was remarkably reduced for wound areas smaller than 2 cm². The overall CVs were 6.0%, 6.3%, 1.6%, and 3.1% for the Elliptical method, the Visitrak device, the TeleDiaFoS system, and the SilhouetteMobile device, respectively. The precision of the Visitrak device was revealed to be remarkably lower for small wounds (<2 cm²). CONCLUSIONS: The Elliptical method gives overestimation up to 33%; thus, it should not be used in applications where the actual wound area is an important parameter (like the prediction of wound healing). The TeleDiaFoS system and the SilhouetteMobile device showed the best accuracy of all used methods; however, the precision of the TeleDiaFoS system was revealed to be higher than the precision of the SilhouetteMobile device. The accuracy and the precision of the Visitrak device are significantly reduced for wounds smaller than 2 cm².
AIM: The present study assesses precision and accuracy of four selected methods of wound area measurements in diabetic foot wounds. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The areas of 16 wound shapes were measured using linear measurement with elliptical estimation (Elliptical method), using the Visitrak™ (Smith & Nephew, London, United Kingdom) device, the SilhouetteMobile™ device (ARANZ Medical Ltd., Christchurch, New Zealand), and the TeleDiaFoS system (Nalecz Institute of Biocybernetics and Biomedical Engineering, Warsaw, Poland). The actual area of a wound shape was determined with a tested scanner and specifically developed software. Accuracy of the area measurement method was assessed by the relative error (RE), whereas precision was assessed by the coefficient of variation (CV). RESULTS: The overall absolute REs were 13.3%, 6.8%, 2.1%, and 2.3% for the Elliptical method, the Visitrak device, the TeleDiaFoS system, and the SilhouetteMobile device, respectively. The accuracy of the Visitrak device was remarkably reduced for wound areas smaller than 2 cm². The overall CVs were 6.0%, 6.3%, 1.6%, and 3.1% for the Elliptical method, the Visitrak device, the TeleDiaFoS system, and the SilhouetteMobile device, respectively. The precision of the Visitrak device was revealed to be remarkably lower for small wounds (<2 cm²). CONCLUSIONS: The Elliptical method gives overestimation up to 33%; thus, it should not be used in applications where the actual wound area is an important parameter (like the prediction of wound healing). The TeleDiaFoS system and the SilhouetteMobile device showed the best accuracy of all used methods; however, the precision of the TeleDiaFoS system was revealed to be higher than the precision of the SilhouetteMobile device. The accuracy and the precision of the Visitrak device are significantly reduced for wounds smaller than 2 cm².
Authors: Jessica D Bills; Sandra J Berriman; Debby L Noble; Lawrence A Lavery; Kathryn E Davis Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2015-11-11 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Piotr Foltynski; Piotr Ladyzynski; Anna Ciechanowska; Karolina Migalska-Musial; Grzegorz Judzewicz; Stanislawa Sabalinska Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 3.240