Abstract
BACKGROUND: In an era of increasing technology and telehealth utilization, three-dimensional (3D) wound cameras promise reliable, rapid, and touch-free ulceration measurements. However, reliability data for commercially available devices in the diabetes foot service setting is lacking. We aimed to evaluate the reliability of diabetes-related foot ulceration measurement using a 3D wound camera in comparison to the routinely used ruler and probe. METHOD: Participants were prospectively recruited from a tertiary interdisciplinary diabetes foot service. Ulcerations were measured at each visit by two blinded observers, first by ruler and probe, and then using a 3D wound camera twice. Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Measurement methods were compared by Pearson correlation. RESULTS: Sixty-three ulcerations affecting 38 participants were measured over 122 visits. Interobserver reliability of ruler measurement was excellent for estimated area (ICC 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.98) and depth (ICC 0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.95). Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the 3D wound camera area was excellent (ICC 0.96, 95%CI 0.95-0.97 and 0.97 95% CI 0.96-0.98, respectively). Depth was unrecordable in over half of 3D wound camera measurements, and reliability was inferior to probe measurement. Area correlation between methods was good (R = 0.88 and 0.94 per observer); however, depth correlation was poor (R = 0.49 and 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: 3D wound cameras offer practical advantages over ruler-based measurement. In diabetes-related foot ulceration, the reliability and comparability of area measurement was excellent across both methods, although depth was more reliably obtained by the probe. These limitations, together with cost, are important considerations if implementing this technology in diabetes foot care.