Differences in foot care practice between participants at risk for and with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) in community

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 144-148
Author(s):  
Uswatun Hasanah ◽  
Saldy Yusuf ◽  
Rini Rachmawaty ◽  
Musdalifah Mukhtar ◽  
Serlina Sandi
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Foot Care

Foot care practice – The key to prevent diabetic foot ulcers in India

The Foot ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gopi Chellan ◽  
Soumya Srikumar ◽  
Ajit Kumar Varma ◽  
T.S. Mangalanandan ◽  
K.R. Sundaram ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Foot Care

scholarly journals Emerging Diabetic Foot Ulcer Microbiome Analysis using Cutting Edge Technologies

2021 ◽  
pp. 193229682199009
Author(s):  
Brian M. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Foot Ulcer ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Molecular Techniques ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Antibiotic Administration ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Conventional Culture

One of the most prevalent complications of diabetes mellitus are diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Diabetic foot ulcers represent a complex condition placing individuals at-risk for major lower extremity amputations and are an independent predictor of patient mortality. DFU heal poorly when standard of care therapy is applied. In fact, wound healing occurs only approximately 30% within 12 weeks and only 45% regardless of time when standard of care is utilized. Similarly, diabetic foot infections occur in half of all DFU and conventional microbiologic cultures can take several days to process before a result is known. DFU represent a significant challenge in this regard because DFU often demonstrate polymicrobial growth, become resistant to preferred antibiotic therapy, and do not inform providers about long-term prognosis. In addition, conventional culture yields may be affected by the timing of antibiotic administration and collection of tissue for analysis. This may lead to suboptimal antibiotic administration or debilitating amputations. The microbiome of DFU is a new frontier to better understand the interactions between host organisms and pathogenic ones. Newer molecular techniques are readily available to assist in analyzing the constituency of the microbiome of DFU. These emerging techniques have already been used to study the microbiome of DFU and have clinical implications that may alter standard of care practice in the near future. Here emerging molecular techniques that can provide clinicians with rapid DFU-related-information and help prognosticate outcomes in this vulnerable patient population are presented.

scholarly journals Prevention and treatment of diabetic foot ulcers

2017 ◽  
Vol 110 (3) ◽  
pp. 104-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Zhang Ming Lim ◽  
Natasha Su Lynn Ng ◽  
Cecil Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Healthcare Access ◽  
Foot Ulcer ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcer ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Foot Care ◽  
Healthcare Provision ◽  
Foot Complications

The rising prevalence of diabetes estimated at 3.6 million people in the UK represents a major public health and socioeconomic burden to our National Health Service. Diabetes and its associated complications are of a growing concern. Diabetes-related foot complications have been identified as the single most common cause of morbidity among diabetic patients. The complicating factor of underlying peripheral vascular disease renders the majority of diabetic foot ulcers asymptomatic until latter evidence of non-healing ulcers become evident. Therefore, preventative strategies including annual diabetic foot screening and diabetic foot care interventions facilitated through a multidisciplinary team have been implemented to enable early identification of diabetic patients at high risk of diabetic foot complications. The National Diabetes Foot Care Audit reported significant variability and deficiencies of care throughout England and Wales, with emphasis on change in the structure of healthcare provision and commissioning, improvement of patient education and availability of healthcare access, and emphasis on preventative strategies to reduce morbidities and mortality of this debilitating disease. This review article aims to summarise major risk factors contributing to the development of diabetic foot ulcers. It also considers the key evidence-based strategies towards preventing diabetic foot ulcer. We discuss tools used in risk stratification and classifications of foot ulcer.

Outpatient Care and Morbidity Reduction in Diabetic Foot Ulcers Associated with Chronic Pressure Callus

2001 ◽  
Vol 91 (6) ◽  
pp. 275-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald A. Sage ◽  
Julie Kate Webster ◽  
Susan Gross Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Outpatient Care ◽  
Traumatic Event ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Minor Trauma ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Foot Care ◽  
Foot Ulceration ◽  
Outpatient Visits ◽  
Foot Clinic

In a retrospective review of 233 cases of diabetic foot ulceration preceded by minor trauma, 192 ulcerations exhibited focal pressure keratosis as the preceding traumatic event. The frequency of outpatient visits and other foot care interventions were correlated with the occurrence and severity of ulceration. Patients seen more frequently in an outpatient foot clinic had less severe ulcers and were less likely to undergo surgical treatment than those with less frequent visits. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 91(6): 275-279, 2001)

Effect of electrical stimulation on foot skin perfusion in persons with or at risk for diabetic foot ulcers

1998 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 434-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darlene M. Gilcreast ◽  
Nancy A. Stotts ◽  
Erika S. Froelicher ◽  
Lucinda L. Baker ◽  
Kathryn M. Moss
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Skin Perfusion

scholarly journals Foot thermometry with mHeath-based supplementation to prevent diabetic foot ulcers: A randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Lazo-Porras ◽  
Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz ◽  
Alvaro Taype-Rondan ◽  
Robert H. Gilman ◽  
German Malaga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Foot Care ◽  
Foot Ulceration ◽  
History Of

Background: Novel approaches to reduce diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) in low- and middle-income countries are needed. Our objective was to compare incidence of DFUs in the thermometry plus mobile health (mHealth) reminders (intervention) vs. thermometry-only (control). Methods: We conducted a randomized trial enrolling adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus at risk of foot ulcers (risk groups 2 or 3) but without foot ulcers at the time of recruitment, and allocating them to control (instruction to use a liquid crystal-based foot thermometer daily) or intervention (same instruction supplemented with text and voice messages with reminders to use the device and messages to promote foot care) groups, and followed for 18 months. The primary outcome was time to occurrence of DFU. A process evaluation was also conducted. Results: A total of 172 patients (63% women, mean age 61 years) were enrolled; 86 to each study group. More patients enrolled in the intervention arm had a history of previous DFU (66% vs. 48%). Follow-up for the primary endpoint was complete for 158 of 172 participants (92%). Adherence to ≥80% of daily temperature measurements was 87% (103 of 118) among the study participants who returned the logbook. DFU cumulative incidence was 24% (19 of 79) in the intervention arm and 11% (9 of 79) in the control arm. After adjusting for history of foot ulceration and study site, the hazard ratio (HR) for DFU was 1.44 (95% CI 0.65, 3.22). Conclusions: In our study, conducted in a low-income setting, the addition of mHealth to foot thermometry was not effective in reducing foot ulceration. Importantly, there was a higher rate of previous DFU in the intervention group, the adherence to thermometry was high, and the expected rates of DFU used in our sample size calculations were not met. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02373592 (27/02/2015)

scholarly journals Foot thermometry with mHeath-based supplementation to prevent diabetic foot ulcers: A randomized controlled trial (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Lazo-Porras ◽  
Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz ◽  
Alvaro Taype-Rondan ◽  
Robert H. Gilman ◽  
German Malaga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Foot Care ◽  
History Of ◽  
Control Instruction ◽  
Study Participants ◽  
And Control

BACKGROUND Thermometry monitoring has proven to reduce the occurrence of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). mHealth may contribute to enhance adherence to this effective intervention. OBJECTIVE Our objective was to compare incidence of DFU in the thermometry plus mHealth reminders intervention arm vs. thermometry-only control arm. METHODS We conducted a randomized trial enrolling adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus with foot-at-risk (risk groups 2 or 3) without foot ulcers and allocating them to control (instruction to use a liquid crystal-based foot thermometer daily) or to intervention (same instruction supplemented with text and voice messages with reminders to use the device and messages to promote foot care) and followed for 18 months. The primary outcome was time to occurrence of DFU. A process evaluation was also conducted. RESULTS A total of 172 patients (63% women, mean age 61 years) were enrolled, 86 to each study group. More patients enrolled in the intervention arm had a history of DFU (66% vs. 48%). Follow-up for the primary endpoint was complete for 158 of 172 participants (92%). DFU cumulative incidence was 24% (19 of 79) in the intervention arm and 11% (9 of 79) in the control arm. After adjusting for history of foot ulceration and study site, the HR for DFU was 1.44 (95% CI 0.65, 3.22). Adherence to ≥80% of daily temperature measurements was 87% (103 of 118) among the study participants that returned the logbook, without difference between intervention and control arm. CONCLUSIONS This trial contributes to the evidence about the value of mHealth to prevent diabetes foot ulcers. CLINICALTRIAL Clinical trials, NCT02373592. Registered 27 February 2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02373592

scholarly journals Meningkatkan motivasi dan efikasi diri penderita diabetes tipe 2 dalam pencegahan kaki diabetik menggunakan dukungan kelompok

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 292-300
Author(s):  
Suyanto Suyanto ◽  
Dwi Sulistyowati
Keyword(s):  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
P Value ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Group Support ◽  
Foot Care ◽  
Type 2 Diabetics ◽  
Before And After

Improving motivation and self-efication of type 2 diabetics in prevention of diabetic foot ulcers and infections using group supportBackground: Management of DM (Diabetics) patients according to expectations requires a variety of support, one of them is group support such as the Persadia Club as an organization that helps people with diabetes to manage disease conditions become more controlled. Through group support, motivation and self-efficacy which are important factors in diabetes care behavior will increase. Thus the main action in the prevention of diabetic foot in the form of routine foot care will be carried out by the person with diabetes optimally.Purpose: To determine the effect of group support on motivation and self-efficacy of type 2 diabetics in prevention of diabetic foot ulcers and infectionsMethods: The study design was a quasi-experimental one pre group test one group method to see if there were differences in motivation and self-efficacy in diabetic foot care before and after group support. The study was conducted in May to August 2019 at the Surakarta City Persada Club as a population and a sample of 135 respondentResults: Research shows that there are differences in the self-efficacy of people with diabetes before and after getting group support with p value = 0,000. Thus the hypothesis that the influence of group support on self-efficacy is accepted. Furthermore, the results obtained that there are differences in motivation to take preventive measures for diabetes feet between before and after group support is given with a p value = 0,000. This means that the hypothesis that there is an influence of group support on motivation for diabetic foot prevention.Conclusion: As a suggestion, it is expected that people with diabetes through the Persadia club will always be supported so that their motivation and efficacy is high so that the diabetic foot care measures will be optimally carried out. Keywords: Motivation; Self-Efication; Type 2 Diabetics; Prevention; Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Infections; Group SupportPendahuluan: Pengelolaan pasien DM (Diabetisi) yang sesuai harapan memerlukan berbagai dukungan salah satu diantaranya yaitu dukungan kelompok seperti Club persadia sebagai organisasi yang membantu para diabetisi untuk mengelola kondisi penyakit  menjadi lebih terkontrol. Melalui dukungan kelompok  maka motivasi dan efikasi diri yang merupakan faktor penting dalam perilaku perawatan diabetes akan meningkat. Dengan demikian tindakan utama dalam  pencegahan kaki diabetik berupa tindakan perawatan kaki secara rutin akan dilakukan para diabetisi dengan optimal.Tujuan: Untuk mengetahui pengaruh dukungan kelompok terhadap motivasi dan efikasi diri  penderita diabetes tipe 2 dalam pencegahan kaki diabetikMetode : Rancangan penelitian berupa kuasi eksperimen dengan metode pre post test one group untuk melihat apakah terdapat perbedaan  motivasi dan  efikasi diri dalam tindakan perawatan kaki diabetik sebelum dan sesudah mendapat dukungan kelompok.  Penelitian dilakukan pada bulan Mei hingga Agustus 2019 pada Club Persadia Kota Surakarta  sebagai populasi dan diambil sampel sebanyak 135 respondenHasil: Penelitian menunjukkan bahwa terdapat perbedaan efikasi diri para diabetisi sebelum dan sesudah mendapt dukungan kelompok dengan p value = 0,000,  Dengan demikian hipotesis terdapat pengaruh dukungan kelompok terhadap efikasi diri diterima. Selanjutnya diperoleh hasil bahwa terdapat perbedaan motivasi melakukan tindakan perawatan pencegahan kaki diabetes antara sebelum dan sesudah diberikan dukungan kelompok dengan nilai p value= 0,000.  Hal ini berarti hipotesis terdapat pengaruh dukungan kelompok terhadap motivasi tindakan perawatan pencegahan kaki diabetis.Simpulan: Sebagai saran diharapkan para diabetisi melalui club Persadia selalu diberi dukungan agar motivasi dan efikasi dirinya tinggi sehingga tindakan perawatan kaki diabetik akan optimal dilakukan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document