Constantine Ryan S, Bills Jessica D, Lavery Lawrence A, Davis Kathryn E
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Int Wound J. 2016 Oct;13(5):614-8. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12328. Epub 2014 Aug 14.
In the treatment and monitoring of a diabetic or chronic wound, accurate and repeatable measurement of the wound provides indispensable data for the patient's medical record. This study aims to measure the accuracy of the laser-assisted wound measurement (LAWM) device against traditional methods in the measurement of area, depth and volume. We measured four 'healing' wounds in a Play-Doh(®) -based model over five subsequent states of wound healing progression in which the model was irregularly filled in to replicate the healing process. We evaluated the LAWM device against traditional methods including digital photograph assessment with National Institutes of Health ImageJ software, measurements of depth with a ruler and weight-to-volume assessment with dental paste. Statistical analyses included analysis of variance (ANOVA) and paired t-tests. We demonstrate that there are significantly different and nearly statistically significant differences between traditional ruler depth measurement and LAWM device measurement, but there are no statistically significant differences in area measurement. Volume measurements were found to be significantly different in two of the wounds. Rate of percentage change was analysed for volume and depth in the wound healing model, and the LAWM device was not significantly different than the traditional measurement technique. While occasionally inaccurate in its absolute measurement, the LAWM device is a useful tool in the clinician's arsenal as it reliably measures rate of percentage change in depth and volume and offers a potentially aseptic alternative to traditional measurement techniques.
在糖尿病伤口或慢性伤口的治疗与监测中,对伤口进行准确且可重复的测量可为患者病历提供不可或缺的数据。本研究旨在对比激光辅助伤口测量(LAWM)设备与传统方法在测量伤口面积、深度和体积方面的准确性。我们在一个基于培乐多(Play-Doh®)的模型中,对四个“愈合中”的伤口在伤口愈合进程的五个后续阶段进行了测量,在这些阶段中,模型被不规则填充以模拟愈合过程。我们将LAWM设备与传统方法进行了评估对比,传统方法包括使用美国国立卫生研究院ImageJ软件进行数字照片评估、用尺子测量深度以及用牙膏进行重量-体积评估。统计分析包括方差分析(ANOVA)和配对t检验。我们证明,传统尺子深度测量与LAWM设备测量之间存在显著差异和近乎显著的差异,但在面积测量方面没有显著差异。在两个伤口中发现体积测量存在显著差异。对伤口愈合模型中的体积和深度进行了百分比变化率分析,结果显示LAWM设备与传统测量技术没有显著差异。虽然LAWM设备在绝对测量时偶尔不准确,但它是临床医生工具库中的一个有用工具,因为它能可靠地测量深度和体积的百分比变化率,并为传统测量技术提供了一种潜在的无菌替代方法。