Comparing Digital, Mobile and Three-Dimensional Methods in Pressure Injury Measurement: Agreement in Surface Area and Depth Assessments.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Gul Sahbudak, Ulku Gunes
{"title":"Comparing Digital, Mobile and Three-Dimensional Methods in Pressure Injury Measurement: Agreement in Surface Area and Depth Assessments.","authors":"Gul Sahbudak, Ulku Gunes","doi":"10.1111/jocn.17813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To examine the consistency among three wound measurement methods in assessing pressure injury surface area and to compare manual depth measurement with three-dimensional wound measurement.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Methodological and comparative study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was conducted between 2022 and 2024 at a university hospital, involving 125 pressure injuries. The wound surface area was measured using three different methods, and depth was measured using a sterile cotton swab and three dimensional wound measurement method. STARD reporting guidelines were followed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study found a statistically significant, strong positive correlation among the three wound measurement methods. However, a significant difference was detected, with digital planimetry yielding higher values than other methods. No significant difference was observed between depth measurement methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Digital wound measurement methods are fast, non-contact, accurate and reliable for assessing pressure injury surface area. Additionally, three dimensional wound measurement serves as a potential aseptic, non-contact alternative to traditional depth measurement, making it a valuable tool in clinical settings.</p><p><strong>Implications for the profession and/or patient care: </strong>Future advancements in wound measurement should focus on artificial intelligence-driven wound boundary detection and improved automation for more consistent and reliable measurements.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>The study addressed the absence of a universally accepted 'gold standard' for wound measurement. Findings showed that digital planimetry provided the highest measurements, while three-dimensional wound measurement and imitoMeasure demonstrated accuracy, reliability and efficiency. This research will impact wound care specialists and healthcare institutions by improving pressure injury measurement and promoting standardised digital methods in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>No Patient or Public Contribution.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>NCT06559657.</p>","PeriodicalId":50236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17813","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To examine the consistency among three wound measurement methods in assessing pressure injury surface area and to compare manual depth measurement with three-dimensional wound measurement.

Design: Methodological and comparative study.

Methods: This study was conducted between 2022 and 2024 at a university hospital, involving 125 pressure injuries. The wound surface area was measured using three different methods, and depth was measured using a sterile cotton swab and three dimensional wound measurement method. STARD reporting guidelines were followed.

Results: This study found a statistically significant, strong positive correlation among the three wound measurement methods. However, a significant difference was detected, with digital planimetry yielding higher values than other methods. No significant difference was observed between depth measurement methods.

Conclusion: Digital wound measurement methods are fast, non-contact, accurate and reliable for assessing pressure injury surface area. Additionally, three dimensional wound measurement serves as a potential aseptic, non-contact alternative to traditional depth measurement, making it a valuable tool in clinical settings.

Implications for the profession and/or patient care: Future advancements in wound measurement should focus on artificial intelligence-driven wound boundary detection and improved automation for more consistent and reliable measurements.

Impact: The study addressed the absence of a universally accepted 'gold standard' for wound measurement. Findings showed that digital planimetry provided the highest measurements, while three-dimensional wound measurement and imitoMeasure demonstrated accuracy, reliability and efficiency. This research will impact wound care specialists and healthcare institutions by improving pressure injury measurement and promoting standardised digital methods in clinical practice.

Patient or public contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution.

Trial registration: NCT06559657.

比较数字、移动和三维压力损伤测量方法:表面面积和深度评估的一致性。
目的:探讨三种创面测量方法在评估压伤面积方面的一致性,并比较手工深度测量与三维创面测量的差异。设计:方法学和比较研究。方法:本研究于2022年至2024年在一所大学医院进行,涉及125例压力损伤。采用三种不同的方法测量创面面积,采用无菌棉签和三维创面测量法测量深度。遵循标准报告准则。结果:本研究发现三种创面测量方法具有统计学意义,且具有较强的正相关。然而,检测到显着差异,数字平面测量产生比其他方法更高的值。不同深度测量方法间无显著差异。结论:数字创面测量方法快速、非接触、准确、可靠,可用于评估压伤面面积。此外,三维伤口测量作为一种潜在的无菌,非接触式替代传统深度测量,使其成为临床环境中有价值的工具。对专业和/或患者护理的影响:伤口测量的未来进展应集中在人工智能驱动的伤口边界检测和改进的自动化上,以实现更一致和可靠的测量。影响:该研究解决了缺乏普遍接受的伤口测量“金标准”的问题。结果表明,数字平面测量提供了最高的测量值,而三维伤口测量和imitmeasure显示了准确性,可靠性和效率。这项研究将通过改善压力损伤测量和促进临床实践中的标准化数字方法,影响伤口护理专家和医疗机构。患者或公众捐赠:无患者或公众捐赠。试验注册:NCT06559657。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Nursing (JCN) is an international, peer reviewed, scientific journal that seeks to promote the development and exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to all spheres of nursing practice. The primary aim is to promote a high standard of clinically related scholarship which advances and supports the practice and discipline of nursing. The Journal also aims to promote the international exchange of ideas and experience that draws from the different cultures in which practice takes place. Further, JCN seeks to enrich insight into clinical need and the implications for nursing intervention and models of service delivery. Emphasis is placed on promoting critical debate on the art and science of nursing practice. JCN is essential reading for anyone involved in nursing practice, whether clinicians, researchers, educators, managers, policy makers, or students. The development of clinical practice and the changing patterns of inter-professional working are also central to JCN''s scope of interest. Contributions are welcomed from other health professionals on issues that have a direct impact on nursing practice. We publish high quality papers from across the methodological spectrum that make an important and novel contribution to the field of clinical nursing (regardless of where care is provided), and which demonstrate clinical application and international relevance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信