Diabetic foot disease: a systematic literature review of patient-reported outcome measures.

PURPOSE: Diabetic foot disease is one of the most serious and expensive complications of diabetes. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) analyse patients' perception of their disability, functionality and health. The goal of this work was to conduct a systematic review regarding the specific PROMs related to the evaluation of diabetic foot disease and to extract and analyse the values of their measurement properties. METHODS: Electronic databases included were PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro, Cochrane, SciELO and EMBASE. The search terms used were foot, diabet*, diabetic foot, questionnaire, patient-reported outcome, self-care, valid*, reliabil*. Studies whose did not satisfy the Critical Appraisals Skills Programme (CASP) Diagnostic Study Checklist were excluded. The measurement properties extracted were: Internal Consistency, Test-retest, Inter-rater and Intra-rater, Standard Error of Measurement, Minimum Detectable Measurement Difference, Content Validity, Construct Validity, Criterion Validity and Responsiveness. RESULTS: The PROMs selected for this review were 12 questionnaires. The Diabetic foot self-care questionnaire (DFSQ-UMA) and the Questionnaire for Diabetes Related Foot Disease (Q-DFD) were the PROMs that showed the highest number of completed measurement properties. CONCLUSION: According to the results, it is relevant to create specific questionnaires for the evaluation of diabetic foot disease. It seems appropriate to use both DFSQ-UMA and Q-DFD when assessing patients with diabetic foot disease.

Clinician Assessment Tools for Patients with Diabetic Foot Disease: A Systematic Review.

The amputation rate in patients with diabetes is 15 to 40 times higher than in patients without diabetes. To avoid major complications, the identification of high-risk in patients with diabetes through early assessment highlights as a crucial action. Clinician assessment tools are scales in which clinical examiners are specifically trained to make a correct judgment based on patient outcomes that helps to identify at-risk patients and monitor the intervention. The aim of this study is to carry out a systematic review of valid and reliable Clinician assessment tools for measuring diabetic foot disease-related variables and analysing their psychometric properties. The databases used were PubMed, Scopus, SciELO, CINAHL, Cochrane, PEDro, and EMBASE. The search terms used were foot, ankle, diabetes, diabetic foot, assessment, tools, instruments, score, scale, validity, and reliability. The results showed 29 validated studies with 39 Clinician assessment tools and six variables. There is limited evidence on all of the psychometric characteristics of the Clinician assessment tools included in this review, although some instruments have been shown to be valid and reliable for the assessment of diabetic neuropathy (Utah Early Neuropathy Scale or UENS); ulceration risk (Queensland High Risk Foot Form or QHRFF); diabetic foot ulcer assessment, scoring, and amputation risk (Perfusion, extent, depth, infection and sensation scale or PEDIS and Site, Ischemia, Neuropathy, Bacterial Infection, and Depth score or SINBAD); and diabetic foot ulcer measurement (Leg Ulcer Measurement Tool LUMT).

Instruments of Choice for Assessment and Monitoring Diabetic Foot: A Systematic Review.

Diabetic foot is the most frequent disorder among the chronic complications of diabetes, happening in 25% of patients. Objective clinical outcome measures are tests or clinical instruments that provide objective values for result measurement. The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review of specific objective clinical outcome measures focused on the assessment and monitoring of diabetic foot disorders. The databases used were PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro, Cochrane, SciELO and EMBASE. Search terms used were foot, ankle, diabet*, diabetic foot, assessment, tools, instruments, objective outcome measures, valid*, reliab*. Because of the current published evidence, diabetic neuropathy assessment via sudomotor analysis, cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy and peripheral vascular disease detection by non-invasive electronic devices, wound 3D dimensional measurement, hyperspectral imaging for ulcer prediction and the probe-to-bone test for osteomyelitis diagnosis were highlighted in this study.

Prevention, assessment, diagnosis and management of diabetic foot based on clinical practice guidelines: A systematic review.

AIM: Diabetic foot complications are the main reason for hospitalization and amputation in people with diabetes and have a prevalence of up to 25%. Clinical practice guidelines are recommendations based on evidence with the aim of improving health care. The main aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review of the levels of the evaluation and treatment strategies that appear in the clinical practice guidelines focus on diabetic foot or diabetes with diabetic foot section. Another objective of this study was to perform an analysis of the levels of evidence in support of the recommendations made by the selected clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: A systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and a quality assessment by the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) were performed. The databases checked were "NICE", "Cinahl", "Health Guide", "RNAO", "Sign", "PubMed", "Scopus" and "NCG". The search terms included were "diabetic foot", "guideline(s)", "practice guideline(s)" and "diabetes." RESULTS: Twelve articles were selected after checked inclusion criteria and quality assessment. A summary and classification of the recommendations was completed. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity of levels of evidence and grades of recommendation of the CPGs included regarding the management, approach and treatment of DF makes it difficult to interpret and assume them in clinical practice in order to select the most correct procedures. Despite this and according to the detailed study of the guidelines included in this work, it can be concluded that the highly recommendable interventions for DF management are debridement (very high level of evidence and strongly recommended), foot evaluation (moderate level of evidence and fairly recommended) and therapeutic footwear (moderate level of evidence and fairly recommended).