Haghpanah Sepideh, Bogie Kath, Wang Xiaofeng, Banks Patricia G, Ho Chester H
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, MetroHealth Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Oct;87(10):1396-402. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.06.014.
To compare the accuracy and reliability of 3 wound measurement techniques, including linear and 2 electronic techniques--Visitrak and the VeV MD system.
Repeated measures involving forty 2-dimensional "wounds" with a range of clinically relevant sizes were created using regular paper. Blinded observers measured the surface areas of wounds in 2 sessions, using 3 techniques.
Research department of a tertiary referral center.
Four blinded observers.
Not applicable.
Mixed linear models were fitted to determine interobserver and intraobserver variability. The average root mean square error (RMSE) for each measurement technique was determined to investigate the accuracy.
Intraobserver variation was not significant in most measurement techniques. Interobserver variation was significant for all techniques. Linear measurements showed the highest RMSE, whereas VeV and Visitrak were comparable.
Reliability of repeated wound measurements for all techniques can be achieved only with the same observer. Linear measurement has the least accuracy in evaluating wound size, VeV is slightly better than Visitrak for large wounds, and Visitrak is slightly better than VeV for small wounds. Our study shows that the use of electronic devices is superior to manual techniques to achieve valid measurements of wound area.
比较3种伤口测量技术的准确性和可靠性,包括线性测量以及2种电子测量技术——Visitrak和VeV MD系统。
使用普通纸张制作了40个具有一系列临床相关尺寸的二维“伤口”,进行重复测量。不知情的观察者分2个阶段使用3种技术测量伤口的表面积。
一家三级转诊中心的研究部门。
4名不知情的观察者。
不适用。
采用混合线性模型来确定观察者间和观察者内的变异性。确定每种测量技术的平均均方根误差(RMSE)以研究准确性。
大多数测量技术中观察者内变异不显著。所有技术的观察者间变异均显著。线性测量的RMSE最高,而VeV和Visitrak相当。
只有由同一名观察者进行测量,所有技术的伤口重复测量可靠性才能实现。线性测量在评估伤口大小时准确性最低,对于大伤口,VeV比Visitrak稍好,对于小伤口,Visitrak比VeV稍好。我们的研究表明,使用电子设备在有效测量伤口面积方面优于手工技术。