Footwear and offloading interventions to prevent and heal foot ulcers and reduce plantar pressure in patients with diabetes: a systematic review

n/

The association between foot-care self efficacy beliefs and actual foot-care behaviour in people with peripheral neuropathy: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>People with diabetes and peripheral neuropathy often do not implement the foot-care behavioural strategies that are suggested by many health professionals. The concept of self-efficacy has been shown to be an effective predictor of behaviour in many areas of health. This study investigated the relationships between foot-care self-efficacy beliefs, self-reported foot-care behaviour and history of diabetes-related foot pathology in people with diabetes and loss of protective sensation in their feet.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Ninety-six participants were included in this cross-sectional study undertaken in a regional city of Australia. All participants had diabetes and clinically diagnosed loss of protective sensation in their feet. The participants completed a self-report pen-paper questionnaire regarding foot-care self efficacy beliefs (the "Foot Care Confidence Scale") and two aspects of actual foot-care behaviour-preventative behaviour and potentially damaging behaviour. Pearson correlation coefficients were then calculated to determine the association between foot-care self-efficacy beliefs and actual reported foot-care behaviour. Multiple analysis of variance was undertaken to compare mean self-efficacy and behaviour subscale scores for those with a history of foot pathology, and those that did not.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A small positive correlation (r = 0.2, p = 0.05) was found between self-efficacy beliefs and preventative behaviour. There was no association between self-efficacy beliefs and potentially damaging behaviour. There was no difference in self-efficacy beliefs in people that had a history of foot pathology compared to those that did not.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>There is little association between foot-care self-efficacy beliefs and actual foot-care behaviour. The usefulness of measuring foot-care self-efficacy beliefs to assess actual self foot-care behaviour using currently available instruments is limited in people with diabetes and loss of protective sensation.</p

The development of global consensus guidelines on the management of the diabetic foot

The future for diabetes is grave. Now described as the global epidemic of the 21st century, the increasing incidence of diabetes (in 2007 over 246 million people affected by diabetes) will place considerable strain on resources and will bring suffering to many if the preventative measures promoted by the International Diabetes Federation (IDF), the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) and other diabetes representative organizations are not put into effect. Ulcers of the foot in diabetes are a source of major suffering and cost. Investing in a diabetic foot care guideline can be one of the most cost-effective forms of healthcare expenditure, provided the guideline is goal-focused and properly implemented. The objective of the IWGDF, founded in 1996, is to develop guidelines that will reduce the impact of diabetic foot disease through cost-effective and quality healthcare, based on the principles of evidence-based medicine. Three IWGDF working groups were invited to write specific consensus guidelines on different subjects, according to the current standards of evidence based medicine. Therefore, for the first time, new 2007 texts were produced according to a systematic review of the literature, in order to inform protocols for routine care and to highlight areas which should be considered for further study. After reaching worldwide consensus, the review reports and specific guidelines were launched in May 2007

Practical Guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (IWGDF 2019 update)

Diabetic foot disease results in a major global burden for patients and the health care system. The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has been producing evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. In 2019, all IWGDF Guidelines have been updated based on systematic reviews of the literature and formulation of recommendations by multidisciplinary experts from all over the world. In this document, the IWGDF Practical Guidelines, we describe the basic principles of prevention, classification, and treatment of diabetic foot disease, based on the six IWGDF Guideline chapters. We also describe the organizational levels to successfully prevent and treat diabetic foot disease according to these principles and provide addenda to assist with foot screening. The information in these practical guidelines is aimed at the global community of health care professionals who are involved in the care of persons with diabetes. Many studies around the world support our belief that implementing these prevention and management principles is associated with a decrease in the frequency of diabetes-related lower extremity amputations. We hope that these updated practical guidelines continue to serve as reference document to aid health care providers in reducing the global burden of diabetic foot disease

Guidelines on use of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. In conjunction with advice from internal and external reviewers and expert consultants in the field, this update is based on a systematic review of the literature centred on the following: the Population (P), Intervention (I), Comparator (C) and Outcomes (O) framework; the use of the SIGN guideline/Cochrane review system; and the 21 point scoring system advocated by IWGDF/EWMA. This has resulted in 13 recommendations. The recommendation on sharp debridement and the selection of dressings remain unchanged from the last recommendations published in 2016. The recommendation to consider negative pressure wound therapy in post-surgical wounds and the judicious use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in certain non-healing ischaemic ulcers also remains unchanged. Recommendations against the use of growth factors, autologous platelet gels, bioengineered skin products, ozone, topical carbon dioxide, nitric oxide or interventions reporting improvement of ulcer healing through an alteration of the physical environment or through other systemic medical or nutritional means also remain. New recommendations include consideration of the use of sucrose-octasulfate impregnated dressings in difficult to heal neuro-ischaemic ulcers and consideration of the use of autologous combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin patch in ulcers that are difficult to heal, in both cases when used in addition to best standard of care. A further new recommendation is the consideration of topical placental derived products when used in addition to best standard of care

An international eDelphi study identifying the research and education priorities in wound management and tissue repair

Aim.  To incorporate an international and multidisciplinary consensus in the determination of the research and education priorities for wound healing and tissue repair. Background.  A compelling reason for the study is the lack of an agreed list of priorities for wound care research and education. Furthermore, there is a growth in the prevalence of chronic wounds, a growth in wound care products and marketing, and an increase in clinician attendance at conferences and education programmes. Design.  The study used a survey method. Methods.  A four-round eDelphi technique was used to collect responses from an international population of health professionals across 24 countries. Results.  Responses were obtained from 360 professionals representing many health care settings. The top education priorities related to the standardisation of all foundation education programmes in wound care, the inclusion of wound care in all professional undergraduate and postgraduate education programmes, selecting dressings and the prevention of pressure ulcers. The top research priorities related to the dressing selection, pressure ulcer prevention and wound infection. Conclusion.  Professionals from different backgrounds and countries who are engaged in wound management share a common set of priorities for research and education. Most notably, the priorities identified relate to long-established clinical challenges in wound care and underpin the principles of good patient care practices. The priorities are closely allied to an ageing population and identify many challenges ahead for practitioners engaged in wound management services. Relevance to clinical practice.  The provision of wound care is a major investment of health service resources and remains a clinical challenge today. Research is essential to building evidence-based practice and fundamental to development of quality in standards of practice; education is central to achieving competence to deliver effective care. The determination of research and education priorities is therefore an absolute requirement in developing services.</p