PurposeThe aim of this study was to investigate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with diabetic foot problems and compare the HRQoL between diabetic patients with: 1) diabetic foot problems (DF), including diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) or amputation (AMPU); 2) other diabetic complications (COM), such as diabetic retinopathy (DR), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), or coronary artery disease (CAD); and 3) no diabetic complication (CON).Patients and methodsA total of 254 diabetic patients were studied in a cross-sectional setting. HRQoL was evaluated using Thai version of the Euro Quality of Life Questionnaire (EuroQoL), with five dimensions and five-level scale (EQ-5D-5L). Utility scores were calculated using time trade-off methods.ResultsA total of 141 patients in the DF group (98 DFU and 43 AMPU groups), 82 in the COM group (27 DR, 28 ESRD, and 27 CAD groups), and 31 in the CON group were interviewed. The mean age was 63.2±12.1 years, body mass index was 24.9±4.7 kg/m2, mean hemoglobin A1c was 7.7±2.1%, duration of diabetes was 13.1±9.9 years, and the mean utility scores were 0.799±0.25. After having DF, 21% of patients had lost their jobs. The COM group had lower utility scores than the CON group. Among the diabetic complications, the DF group had the lowest mean utility scores as compared to the COM and CON groups (0.703±0.28 in the DF group, 0.903±0.15 in the COM group, and 0.961±0.06 in the CON group, P<0.01). There was no difference in the mean utility scores between DFU and AMPU groups. Patients in the DF group reported moderate-to-severe problem in all dimensions more than the other groups.ConclusionDF have the greatest negative impact on HRQoL. Therefore, diabetic foot care should be emphasized in clinical practice to prevent foot complications.
Aim No studies have investigated if national guidelines to manage diabetic foot disease differ from international guidelines. This study aimed to compare guidelines of Western Pacific nations with the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidance documents. Methods The 77 recommendations in five chapters of the 2015 IWGDF guidance documents were used as the international gold standard reference. The IWGDF national representative(s) from 12 Western Pacific nations were invited to submit their nation's diabetic foot guideline(s). Four investigators rated information in the national guidelines as “similar,” “partially similar,” “not similar,” or “different” when compared with IWGDF recommendations. National representative(s) reviewed findings. Disagreements in ratings were discussed until consensus agreement achieved. Results Eight of 12 nations (67%) responded: Australia, China, New Zealand, Taiwan, and Thailand provided national guidelines; Singapore provided the Association of Southeast Asian Nations guidelines; and Hong Kong and the Philippines advised no formal national diabetic foot guidelines existed. The six national guidelines included were 39% similar/partially similar, 58% not similar, and 2% different compared with the IWGDF recommendations. Within individual IWGDF chapters, the six national guidelines were similar/partially similar with 53% of recommendations for the IWGDF prevention chapter, 42% for wound healing, 40% for infection, 40% for peripheral artery disease, and 20% for offloading. Conclusions National diabetic foot disease guidelines from a large and diverse region of the world showed limited similarity to recommendations made by international guidelines. Differences between recommendations may contribute to differences in national diabetic foot disease outcomes and burdens.
Antiseptics, with a broader spectrum of antimicrobial efficacy, lower risk of antibiotic resistance development, and minimal collateral damage to host tissues, are important alternatives to control the bioburden in wounds. Povidone iodine (PVP-I), in use for several decades, has the broadest spectrum of activity, a persistent antimicrobial effect, an ability to penetrate biofilms, and a lack of acquired or cross-resistance. It demonstrates good skin tolerance and low cytotoxicity. However, some reports on PVP-I have raised concerns over allergy, ineffective penetration, and toxic effects on host cells. The majority of these concerns are based on in vitro or rodent wound studies with diverse study designs and outcomes; these results may not be directly applicable in the clinical reality in humans. In this paper, we discuss the efficacy and safety of PVP-I and outline its place in wound healing in Asia, based on an appraisal of recent literature and clinical practice across the region.
BackgroundClassification and scoring systems can help both clinical management and audit the outcomes of routine care.AimThis study aimed to assess published systems used to characterise ulcers in people with diabetes to determine which should be recommended to (a) aid communication between health professionals, (b) predict clinical outcome of individual ulcers, (c) characterise people with infection and/or peripheral arterial disease, and (d) audit to compare outcomes in different populations. This systematic review is part of the process of developing the 2023 guidelines to classify foot ulcers from the International Working Group on Diabetic Foot.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science for articles published up to December 2021 which evaluated the association, accuracy or reliability of systems used to classify ulcers in people with diabetes. Published classifications had to have been validated in populations of >80% of people with diabetes and a foot ulcer.ResultsWe found 28 systems addressed in 149 studies. Overall, the certainty of the evidence for each classification was low or very low, with 19 (68%) of the classifications being assessed by ≤ 3 studies. The most frequently validated system was the one from Meggitt‐Wagner, but the articles validating this system focused mainly on the association between the different grades and amputation. Clinical outcomes were not standardized but included ulcer‐free survival, ulcer healing, hospitalisation, limb amputation, mortality, and cost.ConclusionDespite the limitations, this systematic review provided sufficient evidence to support recommendations on the use of six particular systems in specific clinical scenarios.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.