{"title":"使用抗菌敷料治疗糖尿病足溃疡:新西兰奥特亚罗瓦地区足科医师调查。","authors":"Skye Ma, Mike Frecklington, Sarah Stewart","doi":"10.1002/jfa2.12032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are commonly contaminated with pathogenic organisms and precede most diabetes-related amputations. Antimicrobial dressings are used in the treatment of DFUs; however, recent guidelines do not support their use. There are no data describing the experience of antimicrobial dressing use among podiatrists in Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ). This study aimed to (i) determine which antimicrobial dressings podiatrists in AoNZ use for the management of diabetic foot ulcers; and (ii) determine what factors influence AoNZ podiatrists' use of antimicrobial dressing when managing DFUs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous cross-sectional web-based survey was undertaken. Participants were AoNZ registered podiatrists who managed DFUs in their practice. The survey included questions relating to personal and professional demographic characteristics and DFU management and dressing practices. Descriptive statistics were computed to address the research aims.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses from 43 AoNZ podiatrists were included. Participants reported both cadexomer iodine and silver dressings were the most common antimicrobial dressings used, with honey dressings being the least frequently used. The most influential factors in choosing antimicrobial dressings when managing DFUs were the presence of current infection, ulcer exudate and ability to prevent future infection. The least influential factors in choosing antimicrobial dressings when managing DFUs were patient preferences, cost of dressings and comfort of dressing/pain on removal.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AoNZ podiatrists managing DFUs primarily use antimicrobial dressings containing cadexomer iodine or silver as active ingredients, while lower-cost options, such as honey and povidone iodine are less often used. Current recommendations highlight the lack of evidence to support positive outcomes from any particular antimicrobial dressing over another and advocate that exudate control, comfort and cost be prioritised in decision-making. As cost has been an increasing burden to our healthcare funding, clinicians and organisations may consider this before purchasing and stocking expensive dressings.</p>","PeriodicalId":49164,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot and Ankle Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11296712/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The use of antimicrobial dressings for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: A survey of podiatrists in Aotearoa New Zealand.\",\"authors\":\"Skye Ma, Mike Frecklington, Sarah Stewart\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jfa2.12032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are commonly contaminated with pathogenic organisms and precede most diabetes-related amputations. Antimicrobial dressings are used in the treatment of DFUs; however, recent guidelines do not support their use. There are no data describing the experience of antimicrobial dressing use among podiatrists in Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ). This study aimed to (i) determine which antimicrobial dressings podiatrists in AoNZ use for the management of diabetic foot ulcers; and (ii) determine what factors influence AoNZ podiatrists' use of antimicrobial dressing when managing DFUs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous cross-sectional web-based survey was undertaken. Participants were AoNZ registered podiatrists who managed DFUs in their practice. The survey included questions relating to personal and professional demographic characteristics and DFU management and dressing practices. Descriptive statistics were computed to address the research aims.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses from 43 AoNZ podiatrists were included. Participants reported both cadexomer iodine and silver dressings were the most common antimicrobial dressings used, with honey dressings being the least frequently used. The most influential factors in choosing antimicrobial dressings when managing DFUs were the presence of current infection, ulcer exudate and ability to prevent future infection. The least influential factors in choosing antimicrobial dressings when managing DFUs were patient preferences, cost of dressings and comfort of dressing/pain on removal.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AoNZ podiatrists managing DFUs primarily use antimicrobial dressings containing cadexomer iodine or silver as active ingredients, while lower-cost options, such as honey and povidone iodine are less often used. Current recommendations highlight the lack of evidence to support positive outcomes from any particular antimicrobial dressing over another and advocate that exudate control, comfort and cost be prioritised in decision-making. As cost has been an increasing burden to our healthcare funding, clinicians and organisations may consider this before purchasing and stocking expensive dressings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Foot and Ankle Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11296712/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Foot and Ankle Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jfa2.12032\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot and Ankle Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jfa2.12032","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The use of antimicrobial dressings for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: A survey of podiatrists in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Introduction: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are commonly contaminated with pathogenic organisms and precede most diabetes-related amputations. Antimicrobial dressings are used in the treatment of DFUs; however, recent guidelines do not support their use. There are no data describing the experience of antimicrobial dressing use among podiatrists in Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ). This study aimed to (i) determine which antimicrobial dressings podiatrists in AoNZ use for the management of diabetic foot ulcers; and (ii) determine what factors influence AoNZ podiatrists' use of antimicrobial dressing when managing DFUs.
Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional web-based survey was undertaken. Participants were AoNZ registered podiatrists who managed DFUs in their practice. The survey included questions relating to personal and professional demographic characteristics and DFU management and dressing practices. Descriptive statistics were computed to address the research aims.
Results: Responses from 43 AoNZ podiatrists were included. Participants reported both cadexomer iodine and silver dressings were the most common antimicrobial dressings used, with honey dressings being the least frequently used. The most influential factors in choosing antimicrobial dressings when managing DFUs were the presence of current infection, ulcer exudate and ability to prevent future infection. The least influential factors in choosing antimicrobial dressings when managing DFUs were patient preferences, cost of dressings and comfort of dressing/pain on removal.
Conclusions: AoNZ podiatrists managing DFUs primarily use antimicrobial dressings containing cadexomer iodine or silver as active ingredients, while lower-cost options, such as honey and povidone iodine are less often used. Current recommendations highlight the lack of evidence to support positive outcomes from any particular antimicrobial dressing over another and advocate that exudate control, comfort and cost be prioritised in decision-making. As cost has been an increasing burden to our healthcare funding, clinicians and organisations may consider this before purchasing and stocking expensive dressings.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, the official journal of the Australian Podiatry Association and The College of Podiatry (UK), is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of policy, organisation, delivery and clinical practice related to the assessment, diagnosis, prevention and management of foot and ankle disorders.
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research covers a wide range of clinical subject areas, including diabetology, paediatrics, sports medicine, gerontology and geriatrics, foot surgery, physical therapy, dermatology, wound management, radiology, biomechanics and bioengineering, orthotics and prosthetics, as well the broad areas of epidemiology, policy, organisation and delivery of services related to foot and ankle care.
The journal encourages submissions from all health professionals who manage lower limb conditions, including podiatrists, nurses, physical therapists and physiotherapists, orthopaedists, manual therapists, medical specialists and general medical practitioners, as well as health service researchers concerned with foot and ankle care.
The Australian Podiatry Association and the College of Podiatry (UK) have reserve funds to cover the article-processing charge for manuscripts submitted by its members. Society members can email the appropriate contact at Australian Podiatry Association or The College of Podiatry to obtain the corresponding code to enter on submission.