In the treatment of chronic wounds the wound surface area change over time is useful parameter in assessment of the applied therapy plan. The more precise the method of wound area measurement the earlier may be identified and changed inappropriate treatment plan. Digital planimetry may be used in wound area measurement and therapy assessment when it is properly used, but the common problem is the camera lens orientation during the taking of a picture. The camera lens axis should be perpendicular to the wound plane, and if it is not, the measured area differ from the true area. Current study shows that the use of 2 rulers placed in parallel below and above the wound for the calibration increases on average 3.8 times the precision of area measurement in comparison to the measurement with one ruler used for calibration. The proposed procedure of calibration increases also 4 times accuracy of area measurement. It was also showed that wound area range and camera type do not influence the precision of area measurement with digital planimetry based on two ruler calibration, however the measurements based on smartphone camera were significantly less accurate than these based on D-SLR or compact cameras. Area measurement on flat surface was more precise with the digital planimetry with 2 rulers than performed with the Visitrak device, the Silhouette Mobile device or the AreaMe software-based method. The calibration in digital planimetry with using 2 rulers remarkably increases precision and accuracy of measurement and therefore should be recommended instead of calibration based on single ruler.

Wound surface area measurement is important as therapeutic decisions may depend on the change of wound surface area over time. Digital planimetry is a popular technique in wound area measurement. It is accurate and repeatable when calibration is performed with 2 rulers placed at opposite sides of a wound. The aim of the current study was improving accuracy and precision of wound area measurement using capabilities of smart devices. The correction of area measurement based on calculated camera tilt angle and the calculation of calibration coefficient of linear dimensions as weighted average were proposed. These and other improvements were applied in the Planimator app for Android, which was then used in the study. Accuracy and precision of the Planimator app were compared to the Visitrak device, the SilhouetteMobile device, the AreaMe software, and to the digital planimetry based on 2-ruler calibration with pictures taken by the smartphone, compact, and D-SLR cameras. Areas of 40 wound shapes of area ranged from 0.14 to 31.72 cm² were measured with each device. Medians of relative errors (REs) were compared in the accuracy tests and standard deviations (SDs) of relative differences (RDs) were compared in the tests of precision. The median of REs for the Planimator app was not significantly different from the medians of REs for the digital planimetry based on pictures from the compact or D-SLR cameras, but it was significantly lower than the medians of REs for the Visitrak and SilhouetteMobile devices, the AreaMe software and the digital planimetry based on pictures from a smartphone camera. The SD of RDs for the Planimator app was not significantly different from the SDs of RDs for the digital planimetry based on pictures from the compact or D-SLR cameras, but it was significantly lower than the SDs of RDs for the Visitrak and SilhouetteMobile devices, the AreaMe software and the digital planimetry based on pictures from a smartphone camera. The Planimator app installed at a smartphone revealed to be 2-fold more accurate and 1.5-fold more precise than the measurements with using ImageJ software based on pictures taken with the same smartphone. The Planimator app occurred to have the same accuracy and precision as measurements with digital planimetry with 2-ruler calibration and based on pictures from a compact camera or a D-SLR camera. This app showed better accuracy and precision than the Visitrak and SilhouetteMobile devices, the AreaMe software and the digital planimetry based on pictures from a smartphone camera.

Aim: The present study assesses precision and accuracy of four selected methods of wound area measurements in diabetic foot wounds. Materials and Methods: The areas of 16 wound shapes were measured using linear measurement with elliptical estimation (Elliptical method), using the Visitrak™ (Smith & Nephew, London, United Kingdom) device, the SilhouetteMobile™ device (ARANZ Medical Ltd., Christchurch, New Zealand), and the TeleDiaFoS system (Nalecz Institute of Biocybernetics and Biomedical Engineering, Warsaw, Poland). The actual area of a wound shape was determined with a tested scanner and specifically developed software. Accuracy of the area measurement method was assessed by the relative error (RE), whereas precision was assessed by the coefficient of variation (CV). Results: The overall absolute REs were 13.3%, 6.8%, 2.1%, and 2.3% for the Elliptical method, the Visitrak device, the TeleDiaFoS system, and the SilhouetteMobile device, respectively. The accuracy of the Visitrak device was remarkably reduced for wound areas smaller than 2 cm². The overall CVs were 6.0%, 6.3%, 1.6%, and 3.1% for the Elliptical method, the Visitrak device, the TeleDiaFoS system, and the SilhouetteMobile device, respectively. The precision of the Visitrak device was revealed to be remarkably lower for small wounds (<2 cm²). Conclusions: The Elliptical method gives overestimation up to 33%; thus, it should not be used in applications where the actual wound area is an important parameter (like the prediction of wound healing). The TeleDiaFoS system and the SilhouetteMobile device showed the best accuracy of all used methods; however, the precision of the TeleDiaFoS system was revealed to be higher than the precision of the SilhouetteMobile device. The accuracy and the precision of the Visitrak device are significantly reduced for wounds smaller than 2 cm².

Background: Diabetic foot ulcer area is a basic parameter used for monitoring the wound healing and effectiveness of the treatment applied. TeleDiaFoS (developed earlier in collaboration with the Department and Clinic of Gastroenterology and Metabolic Diseases, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland) is one of just a few systems available that make possible monitoring of the wound size remotely based on the foot scans transmitted to the physician from a patient's home. The aim of this study was to compare the diabetic foot ulcer areas measured using TeleDiaFoS with the results obtained using three reference methods. Methods: The reference measurements were conducted using the elliptical method with a ruler, the wound tracing method and planimetrics with the Visitrak (Smith & Nephew, London, UK) system, and the pattern-coded structured light method with the Silhouette (ARANZ Medical, Christchurch, New Zealand) system. Regression and Bland–Altman analyses were performed. The study group consisted of 23 diabetes patients with plantar foot ulcers. Results: Thirty-three wounds were successfully examined. The measurement method influenced the measured area significantly ( P =0.00005). The correlation coefficients between TeleDiaFoS and the ruler, Visitrak, and Silhouette methods were 0.949, 0.985, and 0.987, and the limits of agreement equaled −1.3±5.5 cm ² , −0.4±2.2 cm ² , and −0.6±2.1 cm ² , respectively. The strong linear relationships obtained can be used to convert the wound area measured with TeleDiaFoS to the corresponding value of each of the reference methods. Conclusions: The results indicate that the wound area of plantar ulcers in diabetes might be monitored effectively using the TeleDiaFoS system based on the foot scans that the patient can produce at home with no assistance of other persons.