Successful management of diabetic foot ulceration (DFU) is crucial for preventing long-term morbidity and lowering risk of amputations. This can be achieved with a multifaceted approach involving a multidisciplinary team, with the patient at the centre. However, not all healthcare setups enable this, and the rate of lower limb amputations continues to rise. It is therefore time to consider new approaches to diabetic foot care, capitalising on engagement from patients in self-management while supported by their informal caregivers (ICGs) to help improve outcome. The role of ICGs in DFU care has the potential to make a significant difference in outcome, yet this resource remains, in most cases, underutilised. Limited research has been conducted in this area to reveal the true impact on patient outcomes and the caregivers themselves. This narrative review aims to explore how ICGs can benefit DFU management with applicability to different healthcare setups while benefiting from established experience in the care of other chronic health conditions.

Introduction Diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) and infection (DFI) are a major diabetes-related problem around the world due to the high prevalence of diabetes in the population. The aim of our study was to determine the microbiological profile of infected ulcers in patients attending Dasman Diabetes Institute (DDI) clinics in Kuwait and to analyze the distribution of microbial isolates according to wound grade, sex, age and diabetes control. Methods We collected and analyzed clinical data and samples from 513 diabetic patients with foot ulcers referred to our podiatry clinic at DDI from Jan 2011 till Dec 2017. Results We show a higher prevalence of DFU in men than in women, and a greater percentage of DFU occurred in men at an earlier age (p<0.05). Only about half of the DFU were clinically infected (49.3%) but 92% of DFU showed bacterial growth in the microbiological lab analysis. In addition, we isolated more monomicrobial (57.3%) than polymicrobial (34.8%) DFI and representing an average of 1.30 pathogens per patient. The presence of Gram-positive and Gram-negative strains was comparable between men and women regardless their age or glucose levels. Interestingly, more Gram-positive strains are present in ulcers without ischemia while more Gram-negative strains are present in ulcers with ischemia (p<0.05). While Staphylococcus aureus was common in infected ulcers without ischemia, Pseudomonas aeruginosa was predominant in ulcers with infection and ischemia, regardless of ulcer depth. Finally, a higher percentage of women has controlled HbA1c levels (19.41% versus 11.95% in men) and more women in this group displayed non-infected wounds (60.6% and 43.90% for women and men, respectively). Conclusion Our results provide an updated picture of the DFI patterns and antibiotics resistance in patients attending Dasman Diabetes Institute (DDI) clinics in Kuwait which might help in adopting the appropriate treatment of infected foot and improving clinical outcomes.

Total contact casts are recognized as the gold standard treatment for neuropathic plantar diabetic foot ulceration, endorsed by all national and international consensus papers. Despite this, research has shown that there is a dichotomy between the existing evidence which supports the use of total contact casts in the management of diabetic foot ulcers and its use in clinical practice. This article aims to highlight the benefits, risks, and barriers associated with total contact cast use in the management of diabetic foot ulcers in the clinical setting, with an emphasis on existing research carried out in this field to encourage change in clinical practice and utilization of this effective treatment modality.

By modifying the Infectious Disease Society of America classification and adopting a protocol to administer outpatient oral and intramuscular antibiotics, we have led to substantial cost savings, shorter hospital admissions and also have developed a successful admissions avoidance strategy.

Objective: This single-centred study aims to evaluate the incidence, risk factors and treatment outcomes of a podiatry led, evidence-based diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) clinic. Research design and methods: Data from the DFU database and patient electronic health records were retrospectively collected from patients with new DFUs who were referred for treatment to the Department of Podiatry, Dasman Diabetes Institute, Kuwait, from 1 October 2014, to 31 December 2016. Patients were followed-up until healing occurred or until 6 months after the study end date, whichever came first. Results: All data were analysed using IBM SPSS version 24 software. Data were collected from 230 patients with 335 DFUs. Most DFUs (67%) were present for <3 months from the time of the first podiatry appointment. A total of 56% of DFUs were classified as neuropathic. Most (72%) DFUs healed, with a median healing time of 52.0 days. Chronic kidney disease (p = 0.001), retinopathy (p = 0.03), smoking (p = 0.02), ulcer location (p = 0.03), peripheral arterial disease (PAD) (p = 0.004) and osteomyelitis (p = 0.05) were found to have a meaningful association with DFU outcome. The number of days to heal was associated with ulcer classification (p = 0.005), bacterial infection (p = 0.002), osteomyelitis (p = < 0.001) and PAD (p = < 0.001). Conclusions: The incidence of new DFUs in our tertiary clinic is 3.4%. The incidence of diabetic foot ulceration, days to heal, healing rate and the risk factors influencing healing are in accordance with other multidisciplinary facilities with podiatry input.