Journal of foot and ankle research · 2026
Science or Tradition? Strength of Evidence for Footwear Fit Guidelines From Peer-Reviewed Studies of People With Diabetes-A Foot in Diabetes UK Systematic Review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Jones Petra J, Vlachopoulos Christoforos, Branthwaite Helen, Gohil Krishna, Cassidy Ryan, Morriss-Roberts Chris, Pankhurst Christian, Hill Andrew
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Footwear fit advice for patients and people with diabetes varies significantly. A review of the strength of evidence for footwear fit standards developed in peer-reviewed studies is urgently needed both to inform future research and guidelines.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review to summarise and evaluate strength of evidence (GRADE) and risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) of footwear fit standards in peer-reviewed research studies involving people with diabetes through a search of Medline, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science databases.
RESULTS: Wearing incorrect shoe size increased DFU risk by up to 10 times (OR 1.7, p = 0.001 to OR 10.4, p < 0.001) based on 4 studies (risk of bias: poor (n = 3) to good (n = 1), but GRADE strength of evidence was Low to Moderate). GRADE strength of evidence for recommended footwear length, width and depth were very low to low. No studies were found examining DFU risk or in-shoe pressure in shoelace alternatives, varying toe box shapes, heel width or height.
CONCLUSION: Strength of evidence for current footwear fit guidelines is limited. Footwear fit guidance should currently be based on assessing adequate shoe size, with further research required to determine quantitative ranges for toe gaps, etc.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review to summarise and evaluate strength of evidence (GRADE) and risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) of footwear fit standards in peer-reviewed research studies involving people with diabetes through a search of Medline, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science databases.
RESULTS: Wearing incorrect shoe size increased DFU risk by up to 10 times (OR 1.7, p = 0.001 to OR 10.4, p < 0.001) based on 4 studies (risk of bias: poor (n = 3) to good (n = 1), but GRADE strength of evidence was Low to Moderate). GRADE strength of evidence for recommended footwear length, width and depth were very low to low. No studies were found examining DFU risk or in-shoe pressure in shoelace alternatives, varying toe box shapes, heel width or height.
CONCLUSION: Strength of evidence for current footwear fit guidelines is limited. Footwear fit guidance should currently be based on assessing adequate shoe size, with further research required to determine quantitative ranges for toe gaps, etc.