{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024437299035369776, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006430868167202572, 'mean_word_length': 4.984615384615385, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A study of the efficiency and convenience of an advanced portable Wound Measurement System (VISITRAK).

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
A reduction of pressure ulcer wound area is one of the most important indicators of wound healing. A wound measurement system (VISITRAK), which calculates the area based on simple tracings of wounds, has been developed as a practical tool for assessing wound area at the bedside. However, its accuracy has remained to be clarified in a clinical setting. This study aimed to clarify the clinical accuracy of the VISITRAK system.


DESIGN
A descriptive correlational study.


METHODS
Intra- and inter-rater reliability of wound measuring techniques were calculated using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) from 10 pressure ulcers. Concurrent validity was assessed, using 30 pressure ulcers, by comparing VISITRAK and digital planimetry. Assessment times for VISITRAK and digital planimetry were also compared for clinical practicality.


RESULTS
The VISITRAK reliability results showed high (0.99) ICC values. For validity, a correlation coefficient between VISITRAK and digital planimetry was 0.99. The median time to take a measurement with VISITRAK was significantly shorter than that required for digital planimetry.


CONCLUSIONS
Based on our results, VISITRAK was found to have high intra- and inter-rater reliability and high validity.


RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE
The short measurement time with the VISITRAK system, and the ability to use it at the bedside, make it a useful, convenient device for clinical use.