Skip to main content

Documentation of Ulcer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 1695 Accesses

Abstract

The evaluation of an ulcer encompasses clinical assessment, documentation, diagnosis and follow up of the patient after the treatment is initiated. Documentation is of critical importance for record keeping, to communicate the severity of illness to patient and to analyse the effectiveness of the treatment.Various grading systems are used to describe an ulcer. The different tools used for ulcer documentation can be broadly classified into contact and non- contact methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Spentzoris G, Labropoulos N. The evaluation of lower extremity ulcers. Semin Interv Radiol. 2009;26(4):286–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. NMC. Record keeping – guidance for nurses and midwives. London: Nursing and Midwifery Council; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gethin G. The importance of continuous wound monitoring. Wounds UK. 2006;2(2):60–7.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Papazoglou ES, Zubkov L, Neidrauer M, Rannou N, Weingarten MS. Image analysis of chronic wounds for determining surface area. Wound Repair Regen. 2010;18(4):349–58. Plassman P. Measuring wounds. J Wound Care. 1995;4(6):269–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Plassman P, Jones T. MAVIS: a non invasive instrument to measure area and volume of wound. Med Eng Phys. 1998;20(5):332–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wagner FW. The dysvascular foot: a system for diagnosis and treatment. Foot Ankle Clin. 1981;2:64–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Parisi MCR, Zantut-Wittman DE, Pavin EJ, Machado H, Nery M, Jeffcoate WJ. Comparison of three systems of classification in predicting the outcome of diabetic foot ulcers in a Brazilian population. Eur J Endocrinol. 2008;159:417–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Falagan M. Wound management: can it help us to monitor progression to healing? J Wound Care. 2003;12(5):189–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rodgers LC, Bevilacqua NJ, Armstrong DC, Andros G. Digital planimetry results in more accurate wound measurements: a comparison to standard ruler measurements. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010;4(40):799–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Langeno DK, Melland H, et al. Comparison of two wound volume measurement methods. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2001;14(4):190–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Maytovitz HN, Soontupe LB. Wound areas by computerized planimetry of digital images: accuracy and reliability. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2009;22(5):222–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kundin JI. Designing and developing a new measurement tool. Perioper Nurs Q. 1985;1(4):40–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kundin JI. A new way to size up wounds. Am J Nurs. 1989;89(2):206–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Geogina G. The importance of continuous wound measuring. Wounds. 2006;2(2):60–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Harding KG. Methods for assessing change in ulcer status. Adv Wound Care. 1995;8(4):528–42.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Melhuish JM, Plassman P, Harding K. Circumference, area and volume of healing wound. J Wound Care. 1994;3(8):380–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bulstrode CJ, Goode AW, et al. Stereophotogrammetry for measuring rates of cutaneous healing: a comparison with conventional techniques. Clin Sci. 1986;71:437–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nelson GD. The photography of patients. Clinical photography in plastic surgery. 1 ed. ISBN 0-316-60315-5. Little Brown and Company, USA. 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Johnson M, Miller R. Measuring healing in leg ulcer: practice considerations. Appl Nurs Res. 1996;9(4):204–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Krouskop TA, Baker R, et al. A non contact wound measurement system. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2002;39(3):337–46.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Norman S Williams, Christopher JK, Bulstrode, P Ronan O’ Connell Published by Hodder Arnold, an imprint of Hodder Education, an Hachette UK Company, 338 Euston Road, London NW1 3BH.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gilman TH. Parameter for measurement of wound closure. Wounds. 1990;3:95–101.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seema Khanna .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer India

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Khanna, S. (2016). Documentation of Ulcer. In: Khanna, A., Tiwary, S. (eds) Ulcers of the Lower Extremity. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2635-2_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2635-2_29

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New Delhi

  • Print ISBN: 978-81-322-2633-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-81-322-2635-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics