Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care, Emergency Care ZOL, Genk, Belgium.
Int Wound J. 2010 Oct;7(5):366-77. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2010.00701.x.
Wound bed area measurements are considered to be an essential part of the wound assessment process. Wound care professionals should be aware of the reliability and validity of the techniques they use. The purpose of this study was to assess whether wound care professionals are able to make as accurate and reproducible a measurement of the wound bed area using two methods for area measurement. Five wound care professionals independently assessed 2285 digital wound images for the wound bed area. Each image was measured in random order, three times, and in four angles by providing the rotated versions of each image (0°, 90°, 180° and 270°). Two techniques were compared: free hand drawing and closed polygon (CP) graph algorithm. Comparison of the two techniques showed differences that are, in our opinion, not acceptable in clinical practice when these techniques are used interchangeably and/or the measurements are carried out by different observers. Variations observed between wounds and observers seem related to the difference in perception of the wound bed margin. Our results indicate that repetition of CP graph area measurement results in the lowest difference in repetitive measurements. Study limitations are related to an incomplete consensus on definitions of wound, wound bed, wound edge and wound border. The development of an ontology related to wound images could aid to reduce these ambiguities.
创面床面积测量被认为是创面评估过程的重要组成部分。创面护理专业人员应该了解他们所使用的技术的可靠性和有效性。本研究的目的是评估创面护理专业人员是否能够使用两种面积测量方法对创面床面积进行准确且可重复的测量。五名创面护理专业人员独立评估了 2285 张数字创面图像的创面床面积。每个图像以随机顺序测量三次，并通过提供每个图像的旋转版本（0°、90°、180°和 270°）在四个角度进行测量。比较了两种技术：徒手绘制和闭合多边形（CP）图算法。两种技术的比较显示出差异，我们认为，当这些技术可互换使用和/或不同观察者进行测量时，这些差异在临床实践中是不可接受的。在观察者之间观察到的伤口差异似乎与对创面床边缘的感知差异有关。我们的结果表明，CP 图面积测量的重复结果导致重复测量的差异最小。研究限制与创面、创面床、创面边缘和创面边界的定义不完全一致有关。与创面图像相关的本体的开发可以帮助减少这些歧义。
