Journal of diabetes and its complications · 2020
A systematic review with meta-analysis of the impact of access and quality of diabetic foot care delivery in preventing lower extremity amputation.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Monteiro-Soares Matilde, Vale-Lima Jorge, Martiniano João, Pinheiro-Torres Sofia, Dias Vanessa, Boyko Edward J
Аннотация
AIMS: To assess the impact of diabetic foot care delivery in preventing lower extremity amputation (LEA).
METHODS: We systematically searched the MEDLINE database for research evaluating the association between any aspect of diabetic foot care delivery and risk of LEA. Meta-analysis was conducted by calculating a pooled odds ratio through a random effects model.
RESULTS: Our search retrieved 5093 articles. In total, 58 articles were included: 9 addressing healthcare access, 4 educating health professionals, 2 implementing guidelines, 6 receiving chiropody/podiatry care services and 37 implementing structured diabetic foot care services (SDFC). All of these aspects of diabetic foot care seemed to have a positive impact on preventing LEA. Only SDFC literature met criteria for performing a meta-analysis. For SDFC impact on preventing overall and major LEA but not for minor LEA compelling evidence was observed [aggregated odds ratio (OR) of 0.45 (95% CI 0.37-0.57), 0.40 (95% CI 0.32-0.51), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.67-1.14), respectively]. However, high heterogeneity (superior to 60%) was observed for all outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Results support a reduction in diabetic LEA frequency in association with structured diabetic foot care, and, in particular, major LEA. Less evidence is available for the remaining aspects of diabetic foot care delivery.
METHODS: We systematically searched the MEDLINE database for research evaluating the association between any aspect of diabetic foot care delivery and risk of LEA. Meta-analysis was conducted by calculating a pooled odds ratio through a random effects model.
RESULTS: Our search retrieved 5093 articles. In total, 58 articles were included: 9 addressing healthcare access, 4 educating health professionals, 2 implementing guidelines, 6 receiving chiropody/podiatry care services and 37 implementing structured diabetic foot care services (SDFC). All of these aspects of diabetic foot care seemed to have a positive impact on preventing LEA. Only SDFC literature met criteria for performing a meta-analysis. For SDFC impact on preventing overall and major LEA but not for minor LEA compelling evidence was observed [aggregated odds ratio (OR) of 0.45 (95% CI 0.37-0.57), 0.40 (95% CI 0.32-0.51), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.67-1.14), respectively]. However, high heterogeneity (superior to 60%) was observed for all outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Results support a reduction in diabetic LEA frequency in association with structured diabetic foot care, and, in particular, major LEA. Less evidence is available for the remaining aspects of diabetic foot care delivery.