A prospective study comparing the FLIR ONE with laser Doppler imaging in the assessment of burn depth by a tertiary burns unit in the United Kingdom.

Scars, burns & healing Pub Date : 2020-12-23 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2059513120974261
Jay Goel, Metin Nizamoglu, Alethea Tan, Helen Gerrish, Karen Cranmer, Naguib El-Muttardi, David Barnes, Peter Dziewulski
{"title":"A prospective study comparing the FLIR ONE with laser Doppler imaging in the assessment of burn depth by a tertiary burns unit in the United Kingdom.","authors":"Jay Goel, Metin Nizamoglu, Alethea Tan, Helen Gerrish, Karen Cranmer, Naguib El-Muttardi, David Barnes, Peter Dziewulski","doi":"10.1177/2059513120974261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is the 'gold standard' tool for the assessment of burn depth. However, it is costly. The FLIR ONE is a novel, mobile-attached, thermal imaging camera used to assess burn wound temperature. This study compares the FLIR ONE and LDI in assessing burn depth and predicting healing times.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-five adult patients with burn wounds, presenting at 1-5 days, were imaged with the FLIR ONE and LDI. Infected, chemical and electrical burns were excluded. Healing potential was determined by comparing wound and normal skin temperature for the FLIR ONE and blood flow changes with the LDI. Healing potential was categorised into wounds healing in less than and over 21 days. Pearson's test was used to determine the correlation between changes in wound temperature and healing potential.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Percent total body surface area (%TBSA) was in the range of 0.5-45. FLIR demonstrated a sensitivity of 66.67% and specificity of 76.67% in predicting healing within 21 days, while LDI demonstrated a sensitivity of 93.33% and specificity of 40%. The FLIR ONE showed a significant difference in the mean temperature changes between burns that healed in less than (0.1933 ± 0.3554) and over 21 days (-1 ± 0.4329) (<i>P</i> = 0.04904). Pearson's test showed a significant correlation between the difference in wound and normal skin temperature with healing times (<i>P</i> = 0.04517).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The inexpensive FLIR ONE shows a significant correlation between changes in wound temperature and healing times. It is useful in predicting healing within 21 days. However, evaporative cooling at the wound surface can lead to overprediction of healing times and overtreatment.</p><p><strong>Lay summary: </strong><i>Background</i> Laser Doppler imaging is currently the main tool for burn depth assessment. It works by analysing the blood flow in a burn wound. Based on these findings, it can predict the depth of the burn injury and predict if it will heal in less than or over 21 days. The main problem is that it is costly. The FLIR ONE is a novel, mobile-attached, thermal imaging camera. It can be used to assess burn depth by comparing the temperature of the burn wound to the surrounding normal skin. This information can then be used to predict healing times into less than and over 21 days. <i>The issue being explored</i> The usefulness of the FLIR ONE in assessing burn depth and predicting healing time when compared to the LDI. <i>How was the work conducted?</i> Forty-five adult patients who sustained a burn injury within the last five days were imaged with both the FLIR ONE and LDI. Those with infected, electrical or chemical burns were excluded. Healing potential was determined by comparing the temperature of the burn wound with normal skin for the FLIR ONE and by changes in wound blood flow with the LDI. Healing potential was categorised into wounds healing in less than and over 21 days. The correlation between the temperature changes of the burn wound and healing time was evaluated for the FLIR ONE. <i>What we learned from the study</i> This study was able to demonstrate that the FLIR ONE showed a significant correlation between the temperature difference between the burn wound and normal skin with healing times. When compared with the LDI, the FLIR ONE was useful in predicting if a burn wound will heal in less than 21 days. The FLIR ONE has advantages over the LDI, it is low cost, portable and produces instantaneous images. Ultimately, this developing technology may increase access to higher standard burn care in centres where LDI is not affordable.</p>","PeriodicalId":21495,"journal":{"name":"Scars, burns & healing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b5/25/10.1177_2059513120974261.PMC7768866.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scars, burns & healing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2059513120974261","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is the 'gold standard' tool for the assessment of burn depth. However, it is costly. The FLIR ONE is a novel, mobile-attached, thermal imaging camera used to assess burn wound temperature. This study compares the FLIR ONE and LDI in assessing burn depth and predicting healing times.

Methods: Forty-five adult patients with burn wounds, presenting at 1-5 days, were imaged with the FLIR ONE and LDI. Infected, chemical and electrical burns were excluded. Healing potential was determined by comparing wound and normal skin temperature for the FLIR ONE and blood flow changes with the LDI. Healing potential was categorised into wounds healing in less than and over 21 days. Pearson's test was used to determine the correlation between changes in wound temperature and healing potential.

Results: Percent total body surface area (%TBSA) was in the range of 0.5-45. FLIR demonstrated a sensitivity of 66.67% and specificity of 76.67% in predicting healing within 21 days, while LDI demonstrated a sensitivity of 93.33% and specificity of 40%. The FLIR ONE showed a significant difference in the mean temperature changes between burns that healed in less than (0.1933 ± 0.3554) and over 21 days (-1 ± 0.4329) (P = 0.04904). Pearson's test showed a significant correlation between the difference in wound and normal skin temperature with healing times (P = 0.04517).

Conclusion: The inexpensive FLIR ONE shows a significant correlation between changes in wound temperature and healing times. It is useful in predicting healing within 21 days. However, evaporative cooling at the wound surface can lead to overprediction of healing times and overtreatment.

Lay summary: Background Laser Doppler imaging is currently the main tool for burn depth assessment. It works by analysing the blood flow in a burn wound. Based on these findings, it can predict the depth of the burn injury and predict if it will heal in less than or over 21 days. The main problem is that it is costly. The FLIR ONE is a novel, mobile-attached, thermal imaging camera. It can be used to assess burn depth by comparing the temperature of the burn wound to the surrounding normal skin. This information can then be used to predict healing times into less than and over 21 days. The issue being explored The usefulness of the FLIR ONE in assessing burn depth and predicting healing time when compared to the LDI. How was the work conducted? Forty-five adult patients who sustained a burn injury within the last five days were imaged with both the FLIR ONE and LDI. Those with infected, electrical or chemical burns were excluded. Healing potential was determined by comparing the temperature of the burn wound with normal skin for the FLIR ONE and by changes in wound blood flow with the LDI. Healing potential was categorised into wounds healing in less than and over 21 days. The correlation between the temperature changes of the burn wound and healing time was evaluated for the FLIR ONE. What we learned from the study This study was able to demonstrate that the FLIR ONE showed a significant correlation between the temperature difference between the burn wound and normal skin with healing times. When compared with the LDI, the FLIR ONE was useful in predicting if a burn wound will heal in less than 21 days. The FLIR ONE has advantages over the LDI, it is low cost, portable and produces instantaneous images. Ultimately, this developing technology may increase access to higher standard burn care in centres where LDI is not affordable.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一项前瞻性研究,比较了 FLIR ONE 与激光多普勒成像技术在英国三级烧伤科烧伤深度评估中的应用。
简介:激光多普勒成像(LDI)是评估烧伤深度的 "黄金标准 "工具。但其成本高昂。FLIR ONE是一种新型移动式热像仪,用于评估烧伤创面温度。本研究对 FLIR ONE 和 LDI 在评估烧伤深度和预测愈合时间方面进行了比较:用 FLIR ONE 和 LDI 对 45 名 1-5 天内出现烧伤创面的成年患者进行了成像。感染、化学和电烧伤除外。通过比较 FLIR ONE 的伤口温度和正常皮肤温度以及 LDI 的血流变化来确定愈合潜力。愈合潜力分为伤口愈合时间少于 21 天和超过 21 天。使用皮尔逊检验确定伤口温度变化与愈合潜能之间的相关性:总体表面积百分比 (%TBSA) 在 0.5-45 之间。在预测 21 天内伤口愈合方面,FLIR 的灵敏度为 66.67%,特异度为 76.67%,而 LDI 的灵敏度为 93.33%,特异度为 40%。FLIR ONE 显示,痊愈时间在 21 天以内(0.1933 ± 0.3554)和 21 天以上(-1 ± 0.4329)的烧伤平均温度变化有显著差异(P = 0.04904)。Pearson 检验显示,伤口和正常皮肤温度的差异与愈合时间有显著相关性(P = 0.04517):廉价的 FLIR ONE 显示伤口温度变化与愈合时间之间存在显著相关性。结论:价格低廉的 FLIR ONE 显示伤口温度变化与愈合时间之间存在明显的相关性,有助于预测 21 天内的愈合时间。然而,伤口表面的蒸发冷却可能会导致对愈合时间的过度预测和过度治疗。它的工作原理是分析烧伤创面的血流量。根据这些结果,它可以预测烧伤深度,并预测烧伤是否能在 21 天内或 21 天以上愈合。主要问题是成本高昂。FLIR ONE 是一种新型移动式热像仪。它可通过比较烧伤创面与周围正常皮肤的温度来评估烧伤深度。这一信息可用于预测 21 天以内和 21 天以上的愈合时间。与 LDI 相比,FLIR ONE 在评估烧伤深度和预测愈合时间方面的实用性。工作是如何进行的?使用 FLIR ONE 和 LDI 对 45 名在过去五天内遭受烧伤的成年患者进行成像。感染、电烧伤或化学烧伤患者除外。FLIR ONE 通过比较烧伤创面与正常皮肤的温度来确定愈合潜力,LDI 通过创面血流的变化来确定愈合潜力。愈合潜力分为伤口愈合时间少于 21 天和超过 21 天。FLIR ONE 评估了烧伤创面温度变化与愈合时间之间的相关性。研究结果表明,FLIR ONE 显示烧伤创面与正常皮肤之间的温差与愈合时间之间存在显著相关性。与 LDI 相比,FLIR ONE 有助于预测烧伤创面是否能在 21 天内愈合。与 LDI 相比,FLIR ONE 具有成本低、便于携带、可生成瞬时图像等优点。最终,在 LDI 难以负担的中心,这项正在开发的技术可能会让更多人获得更高标准的烧伤护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of oral Calendula officinalis on second-degree burn wound healing. To bleed or not to bleed? Case series and discussion of haemorrhage risk with enzymatic debridement in burn injuries. An evaluation of clinical psychology input into burns multidisciplinary follow-up clinics. The efficacy of combined ultrasound and electric field stimulation therapy in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Protocol for clinical diagnosis and empiric treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis in severely burned patients: observations and literature review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1