Wounds morphologic assessment: application and reproducibility of a virtual measuring system, pilot study

Main Article Content

Giuseppe Guarro
Federico Cozzani
Matteo Rossini
Elena Bonati
Paolo Del Rio

Keywords

wound care, skin lesions, technology, measurement, digital imaging

Abstract

Background and Aims. Assessment of wounds morphology can be considered, in the everyday medical activity, the first step for the correct pathway of diagnosis. Authors present a pilot study focused on the statistical analysis of 32 cases of wounds measurements conducted by both the traditional method (paper ruler) both the digital smartphone analysis.


Materials and Methods.32 lesions were morphologically evaluated. All the enrolled patients were evaluated by both the traditional method (paper ruler) both a digital smartphone analysis based on the app imitoMeasure. The extracted data were compared to the traditional measurements and a statistical analysis was based on intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).


Results. Three morphological parameters were evaluated: width (expressed in cm), length (expressed in cm) and area (expressed in cm2). The area (expressed in cm2) was found to be the less comparable, but the data were close in this case, too.


Conclusion.The present study shows that the digital measuring systems should be easily addressed as versatile tools that could be applied in daily clinical practice in the future.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 12 |

References

1. Teot L, Ohura N. Challenges and Management in Wound Care. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021 Jan 1;147(1S-1):9S-15S.
2. Medical Advisory Secretariat. Management of chronic pressure ulcers: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2009;9(3):1-203. Epub 2009 Jul 1.
3. Little C, McDonald J, Jenkins MG, et al. An overview of techniques used to measure wound area and volume. J Wound Care. 2009 Jun;18(6):250-3.
4. Moffatt CJ, Doherty DC, Smithdale R, et al. Clinical predictors of leg ulcer healing. British Journal of Dermatology. 2010; 162(1):51–8.
5. Wang SC, Anderson JAE, Evans R, et al. Point-of-care wound visioning technology: Reproducibility and accuracy of a wound measurement app. PLoS One. 2017 Aug 17;12(8):e0183139.
6. Mirzaalian Dastjerdi H, Töpfer D, Rupitsch SJ, Maier A. Measuring Surface Area of Skin Lesions with 2D and 3D Algorithms. Int J Biomed Imaging. 2019 Jan 15;2019:4035148.
7. Khong PCB, Yeo MSW, Goh CC. Evaluating an iPad app in measuring wound dimension: a pilot study. J Wound Care. 2017 Dec 2;26(12):752-760.
8. Kanazawa T, Nakagami G, Goto T et al. Use of smartphone attached mobile thermography assessing subclinical inflammation: a pilot study. J Wound Care 2016; 25(4):177-80.
9. Ahmad Fauzi MF, Khansa I, Catignani K et al. Computerized segmentation and measurement of chronic wound images.
Comput Biol Med 2015; 60:74–85.
10. Stockton KA, McMillan CM, Storey KJ et al. 3D photography is as accurate as digital planimetry tracing in determining burn wound area. Burns 2015; 41(1):80–84.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>