Diabetic Foot Screening: A Systematic Review of Global Guidelines and Questionnaire-Based Tools.

IF 1.5
Glenys Shu Wei Quak, Jaime Hui Xian Lin, Huiling Liew, Elaine Tan, Donna Tan, Loo See Yeo, Jo Ann Lim, Tiffany Chew, Yuan Teng Cho, Shaun Wen Yang Chan, Sadhana Chandrasekar, Zhiwen Joseph Lo
{"title":"Diabetic Foot Screening: A Systematic Review of Global Guidelines and Questionnaire-Based Tools.","authors":"Glenys Shu Wei Quak, Jaime Hui Xian Lin, Huiling Liew, Elaine Tan, Donna Tan, Loo See Yeo, Jo Ann Lim, Tiffany Chew, Yuan Teng Cho, Shaun Wen Yang Chan, Sadhana Chandrasekar, Zhiwen Joseph Lo","doi":"10.1177/15347346251381091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Diabetic foot ulcers are a significant complication of diabetes mellitus, contributing to high morbidity, prolonged hospitalisations, and increased healthcare costs. Early detection through diabetic foot screening (DFS) and preventive management strategies are therefore crucial in reducing the incidence of diabetic foot ulcers and improving patient outcomes. Hence, this study aims to review and summarise the current practices in DFS and risk stratification to aid subsequent clinical management. A systematic search of PubMed and Embase was conducted to identify articles relevant to DFS guidelines and questionnaire-based screening tools. Of 1761 studies screened, 15 met the inclusion criteria. While national and international guidelines provide comprehensive protocols for DFS with similarities in screening components, differences exist in risk stratification approaches, frequency of assessments, and integration of questionnaire-based tools such as Q-DFD, Thai Q-DFD, DFSQ-UMA and MNSI. Analysis of DFS guidelines identified three key components: neuropathy assessment, vascular assessment, and visual inspection. The screening methods include monofilament testing, vibration perception, and pedal pulse palpation with additional tools such as ankle-brachial index being used in some of the guidelines. These can be performed by various healthcare providers, including general practitioners, diabetes nurses, and podiatrists, ensuring accessibility across different healthcare settings. Risk stratification models classify patients into low-, moderate-, or high-risk categories, guiding screening frequency which varies from annual to quarterly assessments depending on risk level. Effective DFS, based on standardised guidelines and risk stratification models, is essential for preventing diabetic foot ulcers. The integration of DFS into routine clinical practice, supported by tools such as validated questionnaires, can significantly improve outcomes for diabetic patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":94229,"journal":{"name":"The international journal of lower extremity wounds","volume":" ","pages":"15347346251381091"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The international journal of lower extremity wounds","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15347346251381091","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Diabetic foot ulcers are a significant complication of diabetes mellitus, contributing to high morbidity, prolonged hospitalisations, and increased healthcare costs. Early detection through diabetic foot screening (DFS) and preventive management strategies are therefore crucial in reducing the incidence of diabetic foot ulcers and improving patient outcomes. Hence, this study aims to review and summarise the current practices in DFS and risk stratification to aid subsequent clinical management. A systematic search of PubMed and Embase was conducted to identify articles relevant to DFS guidelines and questionnaire-based screening tools. Of 1761 studies screened, 15 met the inclusion criteria. While national and international guidelines provide comprehensive protocols for DFS with similarities in screening components, differences exist in risk stratification approaches, frequency of assessments, and integration of questionnaire-based tools such as Q-DFD, Thai Q-DFD, DFSQ-UMA and MNSI. Analysis of DFS guidelines identified three key components: neuropathy assessment, vascular assessment, and visual inspection. The screening methods include monofilament testing, vibration perception, and pedal pulse palpation with additional tools such as ankle-brachial index being used in some of the guidelines. These can be performed by various healthcare providers, including general practitioners, diabetes nurses, and podiatrists, ensuring accessibility across different healthcare settings. Risk stratification models classify patients into low-, moderate-, or high-risk categories, guiding screening frequency which varies from annual to quarterly assessments depending on risk level. Effective DFS, based on standardised guidelines and risk stratification models, is essential for preventing diabetic foot ulcers. The integration of DFS into routine clinical practice, supported by tools such as validated questionnaires, can significantly improve outcomes for diabetic patients.

糖尿病足筛查:全球指南和基于问卷的工具的系统回顾。
糖尿病足溃疡是糖尿病的重要并发症,导致高发病率、住院时间延长和医疗费用增加。因此,通过糖尿病足筛查(DFS)和预防性管理策略进行早期发现对于减少糖尿病足溃疡的发生率和改善患者预后至关重要。因此,本研究旨在回顾和总结目前DFS和风险分层的实践,以帮助后续的临床管理。对PubMed和Embase进行了系统搜索,以确定与DFS指南和基于问卷的筛选工具相关的文章。在筛选的1761项研究中,有15项符合纳入标准。虽然国家和国际指南为DFS提供了全面的方案,在筛查成分上具有相似性,但在风险分层方法、评估频率和基于问卷的工具(如Q-DFD、泰国Q-DFD、DFSQ-UMA和MNSI)的整合方面存在差异。分析DFS指南确定了三个关键组成部分:神经病变评估、血管评估和视觉检查。筛查方法包括单丝测试、振动感知和踏板脉搏触诊,一些指南中还使用了踝臂指数等附加工具。这些可以由不同的医疗保健提供者执行,包括全科医生、糖尿病护士和足病医生,确保不同医疗保健环境的可访问性。风险分层模型将患者分为低、中、高风险三类,根据风险水平,指导筛查频率从年度到季度不等。基于标准化指南和风险分层模型的有效DFS对于预防糖尿病足溃疡至关重要。在有效问卷等工具的支持下,将DFS纳入常规临床实践,可以显著改善糖尿病患者的预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信