IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v15y2006i4p422-427.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wound measurement comparing the use of acetate tracings and VisitrakTM digital planimetry

Author

Listed:
  • Georgina Gethin
  • Seamus Cowman

Abstract

Aims. This study aimed to compare acetate tracing with the new digital planimetry system VisitrakTM (Smith + Nephew). It also aimed to compare the percentage change in wound size after four weeks using both methods. Background. There is a need for development and more widespread use of objective tools in wound management. Wound measurement is an integral part of wound assessment and provides possibly the most objective tool available. To achieve this, practitioners use a variety of methods including acetate tracing and digital planimetry. Studies have demonstrated good inter‐ and intrarater reliability using both methods. Methods. A retrospective, random selection of wound tracings of superficial leg ulcers was completed until 25 tracings of 10 cm2 were obtained. Wound area was calculated firstly by manually counting squares completely within the wound border and those half or more within the border as 1 cm2. The area was then calculated using the VisitrakTM system. Results. The difference between the acetate and VisitrakTM for wounds 10 cm2 the difference between both methods was significant (P = 0·008). After four weeks the number of tracings available was too small for any conclusions to be made. Conclusion. Wound measurement should become part of routine practice. Acetate offers a good indicator of wound size and digital planimetry can enhance the precision of the measurement. Relevance to clinical practice. Accurate and objective wound measurement is a vital component of wound management. It is essential that nurses have adequate training and skills in wound measuring to assess wounds correctly and objectively. Findings from this study can be used when deciding which method should be used in a particular setting when outcomes and cost have been considered. Accurate on‐going wound measuring contributes to improved quality of patient care, more effective communication between professionals, as a predictor to wound healing, to document progress and assess treatment efficacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Georgina Gethin & Seamus Cowman, 2006. "Wound measurement comparing the use of acetate tracings and VisitrakTM digital planimetry," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 422-427, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:15:y:2006:i:4:p:422-427
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01364.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01364.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01364.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Piotr Foltynski & Piotr Ladyzynski & Anna Ciechanowska & Karolina Migalska-Musial & Grzegorz Judzewicz & Stanislawa Sabalinska, 2015. "Wound Area Measurement with Digital Planimetry: Improved Accuracy and Precision with Calibration Based on 2 Rulers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-13, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:15:y:2006:i:4:p:422-427. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.