Sari Kartika Puspa, Saputro Iswinarno D, Handriani Ira, Perdanakusuma David S
From the Department of Reconstructive and Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Dr. Soetomo General Hospital affiliated to the Faculty of Medicine Airlangga University, Surabaya, Indonesia.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2024 Aug 23;12(8):e5902. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005902. eCollection 2024 Aug.
Effective wound assessment is crucial for managing pressure injuries, necessitating a valid and reliable wound bed scoring system that is practical for clinicians. The Falanga score was replaced with the Perdanakusuma score at the Dr. Soetomo General Hospital. However, the accuracy of the Perdanakusuma score remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of the Perdanakusuma score compared with the Falanga score, the gold standard for pressure injury assessment.
We reviewed the medical records of 142 patients with pressure injuries who consulted for wound management at the department of plastic, reconstructive, and aesthetic surgery at Dr. Soetomo General Hospital between 2015 and 2019. We compared the accuracy of the Perdanakusuma and Falanga scores using receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the curve.
Of the total 142 patients with pressure injuries, 76 were men and 66 were women. The mean age was 47.61 years. Of the pressure injuries, 55.6% were stage III pressure injuries. The area under the curve for the Perdanakusuma scores from D-0 to D-15 treatment were 0.702, 0.724, 0.644, and 0.697, whereas the Falanga scores were 0.769, 0.721, 0.631, and 0.576, respectively.
The Perdanakusuma score is a more accurate diagnostic tool for assessing pressure injuries than the Falanga score. Implementing a reliable wound bed scoring system such as the Perdanakusuma score would permit appropriate and timely treatment and improve communication on wound progress, thereby improving the healing rate.
有效的伤口评估对于压疮管理至关重要，因此需要一种对临床医生实用的有效且可靠的伤口床评分系统。在苏托莫博士综合医院，法朗加评分已被佩尔达纳库苏马评分所取代。然而，佩尔达纳库苏马评分的准确性仍不明确。本研究旨在评估佩尔达纳库苏马评分与压疮评估的金标准法朗加评分相比的准确性。
我们回顾了2015年至2019年间在苏托莫博士综合医院整形、重建和美容外科就诊进行伤口管理的142例压疮患者的病历。我们使用受试者工作特征曲线和曲线下面积比较了佩尔达纳库苏马评分和法朗加评分的准确性。
在总共142例压疮患者中，男性76例，女性66例。平均年龄为47.61岁。在压疮中，55.6%为Ⅲ期压疮。从治疗第0天到第15天，佩尔达纳库苏马评分的曲线下面积分别为0.702、0.724、0.644和0.697，而法朗加评分分别为0.769、0.721、0.631和0.576。
与法朗加评分相比，佩尔达纳库苏马评分是评估压疮更准确的诊断工具。实施一种可靠的伤口床评分系统，如佩尔达纳库苏马评分，将有助于进行适当及时的治疗，并改善关于伤口进展的沟通，从而提高愈合率。
