Observational studyDermatology (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Validity and Reliability of Two Digital Wound Measurement Tools after Surgery in Patients with Hidradenitis Suppurativa.
Observational study in Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAfter excision surgery in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), wounds are usually left open for secondary intention healing. To evaluate wound healing, reliable wound measurement is important. However, digital wound measurement tools for measuring the surface area are validated for small wounds located on flat or mildly convex body surfaces in studies, often powered inadequately. Up until now, a validated digital measurement tool to accurately measure wounds on all body surfaces, including the intertriginous areas, was not available.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to validate two digital wound measurement tools for the measurement of the surface area of larger and concave wounds, using surgical wounds in patients with HS.
methodsThis prospective observational validation study included consecutive patients with HS undergoing excision surgery in the Department of Dermatology of the Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam. Wound measurements using a ruler, the tracing method, the inSight® 3-dimensional (3D) device, and the ImitoWound app were performed by three investigators. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for concurrent validity and the intra- and inter-rater reliability were analyzed. The standard error of measurement (SEm) and minimal detectable change were calculated, and Bland-Altman plots were constructed to determine the limits of agreement.
resultsTwenty patients with a total of 52 wounds were included. The wounds had a mean surface of 18.7 cm2. The inSight® 3D device showed an ICC of 0.987 for concurrent validity, 0.998 for intra-rater reliability, and 0.997 for inter-rater reliability. The ICCs from the ImitoWound application were 0.974, 0.978, and 0.964 for concurrent validity, intra-rater reliability, and inter-rater reliability, respectively. The SEms for intra- and inter-rater reliability were 0.95 cm2 and 1.11 cm2 for the inSight® 3D device and 3.33 cm2 and 3.51 cm2 for the ImitoWound app, respectively.
conclusionBoth the inSight® 3D device and the ImitoWound app demonstrated excellent concurrent validity and reliability for the surface measurements of concave wound, enabling these tools to be used reliably in clinical research and daily practice. Furthermore, it paves the way for broader application, such as telemonitoring of wound care at home.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.