MedElevator
Войти в исследования Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2008
Foot ulcer risk and location in relation to prospective clinical assessment of foot shape and mobility among persons with diabetes.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cowley Matthew S, Boyko Edward J, Shofer Jane B, Ahroni Jessie H, Ledoux William R
Аннотация
AIMS: We assessed baseline clinical foot shape for 2939 feet of diabetic subjects who were monitored prospectively for foot ulceration.
METHODS: Assessments included hammer/claw toes, hallux valgus, hallux limitus, prominent metatarsal heads, bony prominences, Charcot deformity, plantar callus, foot type, muscle atrophy, ankle and hallux mobility, and neuropathy. Risk factors were linked to ulcer occurrence and location via a Cox proportional hazards model.
RESULTS: Hammer/claw toes (hazard ratio [HR] (95% confidence interval [CI])=1.43 (1.06, 1.94) p=0.02), marked hammer/claw toes (HR=1.77 (1.18, 2.66) p=0.006), bony prominences (HR=1.38 (1.02, 1.88), p=0.04), and foot type (Charcot or drop foot vs. neutrally aligned) (HR=2.34 (1.33, 4.10), p=0.003) were significant risk factors for ulceration adjusting for age, body mass index, insulin medication, ulcer history and amputation history. With adjustment for neuropathy only hammer/claw toes (HR=1.40 (1.03, 1.90), p=0.03) and foot type (HR=1.76 (1.04, 3.04), p=0.05) were significantly related to ulceration. However, there was no relationship between ulcer location and foot deformity.
CONCLUSIONS: Certain foot deformities were predictive of ulceration, although there was no relationship between clinical foot deformity and ulcer location.
METHODS: Assessments included hammer/claw toes, hallux valgus, hallux limitus, prominent metatarsal heads, bony prominences, Charcot deformity, plantar callus, foot type, muscle atrophy, ankle and hallux mobility, and neuropathy. Risk factors were linked to ulcer occurrence and location via a Cox proportional hazards model.
RESULTS: Hammer/claw toes (hazard ratio [HR] (95% confidence interval [CI])=1.43 (1.06, 1.94) p=0.02), marked hammer/claw toes (HR=1.77 (1.18, 2.66) p=0.006), bony prominences (HR=1.38 (1.02, 1.88), p=0.04), and foot type (Charcot or drop foot vs. neutrally aligned) (HR=2.34 (1.33, 4.10), p=0.003) were significant risk factors for ulceration adjusting for age, body mass index, insulin medication, ulcer history and amputation history. With adjustment for neuropathy only hammer/claw toes (HR=1.40 (1.03, 1.90), p=0.03) and foot type (HR=1.76 (1.04, 3.04), p=0.05) were significantly related to ulceration. However, there was no relationship between ulcer location and foot deformity.
CONCLUSIONS: Certain foot deformities were predictive of ulceration, although there was no relationship between clinical foot deformity and ulcer location.