A prospective non r<strong>and</strong>omised controlled study from Lithuania has assessed a multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>aryapproach to diabetic footcare on recurrent ulceration <strong>and</strong> amputation(Dargis et al, 1999). 145 people with diabetes <strong>and</strong> a past history <strong>of</strong> neuropathic footulcers but no evidence <strong>of</strong> PVD were studied. All received basel<strong>in</strong>e assessment <strong>and</strong>footcare education. People <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>tervention group (n=56) were followed <strong>in</strong> a specialcl<strong>in</strong>ic by a multi-discipl<strong>in</strong>ary team <strong>of</strong> physicians, nurses <strong>and</strong> podiatrists <strong>and</strong> receivedregular podiatry <strong>and</strong> re-education every 3 months <strong>and</strong> provision <strong>of</strong> special footwear asrequired. Scotch cast<strong>in</strong>g was also available to aid ulcer heal<strong>in</strong>g. The st<strong>and</strong>ardtreatment group was followed <strong>in</strong> their local cl<strong>in</strong>ic every 3 months for rout<strong>in</strong>e care.Subjects <strong>in</strong> the two groups had a similar mean age <strong>of</strong> 59 years <strong>and</strong> had a similar<strong>in</strong>cidence <strong>of</strong> neuropathy. Two <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>tervention group <strong>and</strong> 8 <strong>of</strong> the st<strong>and</strong>ardtreatment group were hospitalised with ulcers. The <strong>in</strong>tervention group hadsignificantly fewer recurrent ulcers dur<strong>in</strong>g the two years compared with the st<strong>and</strong>ardgroup (30.4% v 58.4% respectively; OR 0.31 [CI 0.14-0.67], p
<strong>and</strong> orthopaedic surgeons (Thomson et al, 1991). In the Italian study the team<strong>in</strong>cluded a diabetologist, nurse specialist, orthopaedic surgeon, podiatrist, vascularsurgeon <strong>and</strong> radiologist (Ghirl<strong>and</strong>a et al, 1997). In the Swedish study the teamcomprised a diabetologist, orthopaedic surgeon, diabetes nurse, podiatrist <strong>and</strong>orthotist (Larsson et al, 1995). In the London specialised foot cl<strong>in</strong>ic the team <strong>in</strong>cludeda podiatrist, shoe-fitter, nurse, physician <strong>and</strong> surgeon (Edmonds et al, 1986). In theprospective Lithuanian study the team <strong>in</strong>cluded a diabetologist, rehabilitationphysician, podiatrist, orthopaedic surgeon <strong>and</strong> shoe makers (Dargis et al, 1999).In summary, the common components <strong>of</strong> the specialist multi-discipl<strong>in</strong>ary team havebeen a physician <strong>and</strong> podiatrist. Most have also <strong>in</strong>cluded a specialist nurse <strong>and</strong>orthotist <strong>and</strong> all have <strong>in</strong>volved or had ready access to a surgeon.The podiatrist is an essential member <strong>of</strong> the multi-discipl<strong>in</strong>ary team. Plank et al(2003) evaluated the impact <strong>of</strong> regular podiatric care on the recurrence rate <strong>of</strong> diabeticfoot ulcers among 91 people (mean age 65 years) with diabetes <strong>and</strong> healed foot ulcers.47 people were r<strong>and</strong>omly assigned to the <strong>in</strong>tervention group <strong>in</strong> which people receivedmonthly chiropodist care, while 44 were assigned to the control group <strong>in</strong> whichpodiatric care was not recommended. Dur<strong>in</strong>g the median follow-up <strong>of</strong> 386 days, 18people <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>tervention group suffered from ulceration compared with 25 people <strong>in</strong>the control group (HR 0.60, CI 0.32-1.09; p=0.09). However, there were fewer feetaffected <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>tervention group than <strong>in</strong> the control group (20 feet v 32 feet, RR0.52, CI 0.29-0.93; p=0.03). There was no significant difference <strong>in</strong> the location <strong>of</strong>ulcers between the two groups. M<strong>in</strong>or amputation was performed <strong>in</strong> two people <strong>in</strong> the<strong>in</strong>tervention group <strong>and</strong> one person <strong>in</strong> the control group. At the end <strong>of</strong> follow-up, therewas a significant reduction <strong>in</strong> overall events <strong>of</strong> ulceration, amputation <strong>and</strong> death <strong>in</strong> thepodiatric care group (18 v 29 events, HR 0.54, CI 0.30-0.96; p=0.03).Further research is required to def<strong>in</strong>e the core services <strong>in</strong> multi-discipl<strong>in</strong>ary carewhich are essential <strong>in</strong> improv<strong>in</strong>g outcomes by reduc<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>cidence <strong>of</strong> ulcer oramputation <strong>in</strong> people with diabetes with high risk feet (P<strong>in</strong>zur et al, 1996).87
- Page 1:
National Evidence Based Guidelinesf
- Page 4:
Research OfficersMs Linda SmithPodi
- Page 7 and 8:
2.2 Issues for Foot Problems in Typ
- Page 9:
• Aim to achieve the best possibl
- Page 12 and 13:
Background - Peripheral Neuropathy
- Page 14 and 15:
proportion of subjects with a durat
- Page 16 and 17:
and an OR 1.1-7.8. This study also
- Page 18 and 19:
Summary - Peripheral Neuropathy as
- Page 20 and 21:
Section 2: Diabetes Foot ProblemsIs
- Page 22 and 23:
predicting risk of amputation, 2.9
- Page 24 and 25:
Summary - Peripheral Vascular Disea
- Page 26 and 27:
Section 3: Diabetes Foot ProblemsIs
- Page 28 and 29:
Evidence - Foot Deformity and Previ
- Page 30 and 31:
people with both LJM and neuropathy
- Page 32 and 33:
Summary - Foot Deformity and Previo
- Page 34 and 35:
Section 4: Diabetes Foot ProblemsIs
- Page 36 and 37: Also in the Seattle study, 67 peopl
- Page 38 and 39: Summary - Ulcer as a Risk Factor fo
- Page 40 and 41: Section 5: Diabetes Foot ProblemsIs
- Page 42 and 43: The other frequently reported metho
- Page 44 and 45: side; and 82% having the same resul
- Page 46 and 47: Evidence Table: Section 5Detection
- Page 48 and 49: Background - Clinical Detection of
- Page 50 and 51: pulse was bilaterally absent in 1.8
- Page 52 and 53: Evidence Table: Section 6AuthorClin
- Page 54 and 55: Background - Frequency of Foot Exam
- Page 56 and 57: Summary - Frequency of Foot Examina
- Page 58 and 59: Section 8: Diabetes Foot ProblemsIs
- Page 60 and 61: Behaviour assessment scores, measur
- Page 62 and 63: Mazzuca et al (1986) studies 532 pe
- Page 64 and 65: with before the programme, after 1-
- Page 66 and 67: Evidence Table: Section 8AuthorEffe
- Page 68 and 69: Background - Glycaemic Control and
- Page 70 and 71: In a previous Japanese randomised s
- Page 72 and 73: Evidence Table: Section 9AuthorGlyc
- Page 74 and 75: Background - Footwear to Reduce Ulc
- Page 76 and 77: period. In addition people without
- Page 78 and 79: Comparisons of in-shoe foot pressur
- Page 80 and 81: The rate of plantar callus formatio
- Page 82 and 83: Evidence Table: Section 10AuthorFoo
- Page 84 and 85: Background - Foot Clinics and Multi
- Page 88 and 89: Summary - Foot Clinics and Multi-di
- Page 90 and 91: Section 12: Diabetes Foot ProblemsI
- Page 92 and 93: and/or osteomyelitis; III - fore-fo
- Page 94 and 95: Summary - Economic consequences•
- Page 96 and 97: Section 13: Diabetes Foot ProblemsI
- Page 98 and 99: Some ethnic groups are associated w
- Page 100 and 101: Evidence Table: Section 13AuthorSoc
- Page 102 and 103: Calle-Pascual AL, Duran A, Diaz A,
- Page 104 and 105: Jannink MJ, van Dijk H, de Vries J,
- Page 106 and 107: Moss SE, Klein R, Klein BE. The 14-
- Page 108 and 109: Soulier SM, Godsey C, Asay ED, Perr
- Page 110 and 111: Diabetes Foot Problems: General Ref
- Page 112 and 113: McNeely MJ, Boyko EJ, Ahroni JH, St
- Page 114 and 115: Diabetes Foot Problems: Other Refer
- Page 116 and 117: Caputo GM, Cavanagh PR, Ulbrecht JS
- Page 118 and 119: Garbalosa JC, Cavanagh PR, Wu G, Ul
- Page 120 and 121: Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Wunderlich
- Page 122 and 123: Payne C. Regional variations of dia
- Page 124 and 125: Tovi J, Svanborg E, Nilsson BY, Eng
- Page 126 and 127: Criteria used to determine the suit
- Page 128 and 129: QUESTIONS KEY WORDS NO.ARTICLESIDEN
- Page 130 and 131: QUESTIONS KEY WORDS NO.ARTICLESIDEN
- Page 132 and 133: QUESTIONS KEY WORDS NO.ARTICLESIDEN
- Page 134 and 135: QUESTIONS KEY WORDS NO.ARTICLESIDEN
- Page 136 and 137:
QUESTIONS KEY WORDS NO.ARTICLESIDEN
- Page 138 and 139:
QUESTIONS KEY WORDS NO.ARTICLESIDEN