A study of the utility and equivalency of 2 methods of wound measurement: digitized tracing versus digital photography

Abstract

Objective: To examine agreement between digitized tracing and digital photography methods in measuring wound area and healing rate, and to compare and contrast the 2 methods on feasibility and utility in patient care and research settings.

Setting: Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Participants: A total of 20 subjects aged 18 years or older with a spinal cord injury and pressure ulcers that were Stage II or higher, and who had received in- or outpatient wound care at the hospital for at least 3 consecutive weeks.

Methods: Wound area was measured at weekly intervals. One assessor calculated wound area from a digitized tracing. A second assessor calculated wound area using a wound photograph. Both assessors used Image-J software. The 2 methods were compared for differences in weekly wound area and weekly healing rate.

Results: Methods were different for wound area (P < .0001), whereas there was no difference between methods in weekly healing rate (P = .9429).

Conclusions: The 2 methods are in agreement on the important parameter of healing rate. Both methods are feasible in clinical settings. Wound photography may be more useful than digitized tracings because it simultaneously captures wound appearance.