Validation of three‐dimensional wound measurements using a novel 3D‐WAM camera

Line Bisgaard Jørgensen; Sune Møller Skov‐jeppesen; Ulrich Halekoh; Benjamin Schnack Rasmussen; Jens Ahm Sørensen; Gregor B.E. Jemec; Knud Bonnet Yderstræde

doi:10.1111/wrr.12664

Validation of three‐dimensional wound measurements using a novel 3D‐WAM camera

Line Bisgaard Jørgensen, Sune Møller Skov‐jeppesen, Ulrich Halekoh, Benjamin Schnack Rasmussen, Jens Ahm Sørensen, Gregor B.E. Jemec, Knud Bonnet Yderstræde

Department of Clinical Medicine

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To monitor wound healing, it is essential to obtain accurate and reliable wound measurements. Various methods have been used to measure wound size including three-dimensional (3D) measurement devices enabling wound assessment from a volume perspective. However, the currently available methods are inaccurate, costly, or complicated to use. As a consequence, we have developed a 3D-wound assessment monitor (WAM) camera, which is able to measure wound size in three-dimension and to assess wound characteristics. The aim of the study was to assess the intrarater and interrater reliability of the 3D wound measurements using the 3D camera and to compare these with traditional measurement methods. Four raters measured 48 wounds using the 3D camera, digital imaging method (2D area), and gel injection into the wound cavity (volume). The data were analyzed using linear mixed effect model. Intraclass and interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots were used to assess intrarater and interrater reliability for the 3D camera and agreement between the methods. The Bland–Altman plots for intrarater reliability showed minor differences between the measurements, especially the 3D area and perimeter measurements. Moreover, ICCs were very high for both the intrarater and interrater reliability for the 2D area, 3D area, and perimeter measurements (ICCs > 0.99), although slightly lower for the volume measurements (ICC = 0.946–0.950). Finally, a high agreement was found between the 3D camera and the traditional methods (2D area and volume) assessed by narrow 95% prediction intervals and high ICCs above 0.97. In conclusion, the 3D-WAM camera is an accurate and reliable method, which is useful for several types of wounds. However, the volume measurements were primarily useful in large, deep wounds. Moreover, the 3D images are based on digital technology and therefore carry the possibility for use in remote settings.

Original language	English
Journal	Wound Repair and Regeneration
Volume	26
Issue number	6
Pages (from-to)	456-462
ISSN	1067-1927
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12664
Publication status	Published - 1 Nov 2018

Access to Document

10.1111/wrr.12664

Cite this

@article{a6c9aa3469d14a7d95083fb2c64085c4,

title = "Validation of three‐dimensional wound measurements using a novel 3D‐WAM camera",

abstract = "To monitor wound healing, it is essential to obtain accurate and reliable wound measurements. Various methods have been used to measure wound size including three-dimensional (3D) measurement devices enabling wound assessment from a volume perspective. However, the currently available methods are inaccurate, costly, or complicated to use. As a consequence, we have developed a 3D-wound assessment monitor (WAM) camera, which is able to measure wound size in three-dimension and to assess wound characteristics. The aim of the study was to assess the intrarater and interrater reliability of the 3D wound measurements using the 3D camera and to compare these with traditional measurement methods. Four raters measured 48 wounds using the 3D camera, digital imaging method (2D area), and gel injection into the wound cavity (volume). The data were analyzed using linear mixed effect model. Intraclass and interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots were used to assess intrarater and interrater reliability for the 3D camera and agreement between the methods. The Bland–Altman plots for intrarater reliability showed minor differences between the measurements, especially the 3D area and perimeter measurements. Moreover, ICCs were very high for both the intrarater and interrater reliability for the 2D area, 3D area, and perimeter measurements (ICCs > 0.99), although slightly lower for the volume measurements (ICC = 0.946–0.950). Finally, a high agreement was found between the 3D camera and the traditional methods (2D area and volume) assessed by narrow 95% prediction intervals and high ICCs above 0.97. In conclusion, the 3D-WAM camera is an accurate and reliable method, which is useful for several types of wounds. However, the volume measurements were primarily useful in large, deep wounds. Moreover, the 3D images are based on digital technology and therefore carry the possibility for use in remote settings.",

author = "J{\o}rgensen, {Line Bisgaard} and Skov‐jeppesen, {Sune M{\o}ller} and Ulrich Halekoh and Rasmussen, {Benjamin Schnack} and S{\o}rensen, {Jens Ahm} and Jemec, {Gregor B.E.} and Yderstr{\ae}de, {Knud Bonnet}",

year = "2018",

month = nov,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/wrr.12664",

language = "English",

volume = "26",

pages = "456--462",

journal = "Wound Repair and Regeneration",

issn = "1067-1927",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation of three‐dimensional wound measurements using a novel 3D‐WAM camera

AU - Jørgensen, Line Bisgaard

AU - Skov‐jeppesen, Sune Møller

AU - Halekoh, Ulrich

AU - Rasmussen, Benjamin Schnack

AU - Sørensen, Jens Ahm

AU - Jemec, Gregor B.E.

AU - Yderstræde, Knud Bonnet

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - To monitor wound healing, it is essential to obtain accurate and reliable wound measurements. Various methods have been used to measure wound size including three-dimensional (3D) measurement devices enabling wound assessment from a volume perspective. However, the currently available methods are inaccurate, costly, or complicated to use. As a consequence, we have developed a 3D-wound assessment monitor (WAM) camera, which is able to measure wound size in three-dimension and to assess wound characteristics. The aim of the study was to assess the intrarater and interrater reliability of the 3D wound measurements using the 3D camera and to compare these with traditional measurement methods. Four raters measured 48 wounds using the 3D camera, digital imaging method (2D area), and gel injection into the wound cavity (volume). The data were analyzed using linear mixed effect model. Intraclass and interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots were used to assess intrarater and interrater reliability for the 3D camera and agreement between the methods. The Bland–Altman plots for intrarater reliability showed minor differences between the measurements, especially the 3D area and perimeter measurements. Moreover, ICCs were very high for both the intrarater and interrater reliability for the 2D area, 3D area, and perimeter measurements (ICCs > 0.99), although slightly lower for the volume measurements (ICC = 0.946–0.950). Finally, a high agreement was found between the 3D camera and the traditional methods (2D area and volume) assessed by narrow 95% prediction intervals and high ICCs above 0.97. In conclusion, the 3D-WAM camera is an accurate and reliable method, which is useful for several types of wounds. However, the volume measurements were primarily useful in large, deep wounds. Moreover, the 3D images are based on digital technology and therefore carry the possibility for use in remote settings.

AB - To monitor wound healing, it is essential to obtain accurate and reliable wound measurements. Various methods have been used to measure wound size including three-dimensional (3D) measurement devices enabling wound assessment from a volume perspective. However, the currently available methods are inaccurate, costly, or complicated to use. As a consequence, we have developed a 3D-wound assessment monitor (WAM) camera, which is able to measure wound size in three-dimension and to assess wound characteristics. The aim of the study was to assess the intrarater and interrater reliability of the 3D wound measurements using the 3D camera and to compare these with traditional measurement methods. Four raters measured 48 wounds using the 3D camera, digital imaging method (2D area), and gel injection into the wound cavity (volume). The data were analyzed using linear mixed effect model. Intraclass and interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots were used to assess intrarater and interrater reliability for the 3D camera and agreement between the methods. The Bland–Altman plots for intrarater reliability showed minor differences between the measurements, especially the 3D area and perimeter measurements. Moreover, ICCs were very high for both the intrarater and interrater reliability for the 2D area, 3D area, and perimeter measurements (ICCs > 0.99), although slightly lower for the volume measurements (ICC = 0.946–0.950). Finally, a high agreement was found between the 3D camera and the traditional methods (2D area and volume) assessed by narrow 95% prediction intervals and high ICCs above 0.97. In conclusion, the 3D-WAM camera is an accurate and reliable method, which is useful for several types of wounds. However, the volume measurements were primarily useful in large, deep wounds. Moreover, the 3D images are based on digital technology and therefore carry the possibility for use in remote settings.

U2 - 10.1111/wrr.12664

DO - 10.1111/wrr.12664

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30118155

SN - 1067-1927

VL - 26

SP - 456

EP - 462

JO - Wound Repair and Regeneration

JF - Wound Repair and Regeneration

IS - 6

ER -

Validation of three‐dimensional wound measurements using a novel 3D‐WAM camera

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this