Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and infections are common complications that frequently result in reduced quality of life and even morbidity for patients with diabetes. This paper highlights significant findings in DFU treatments and emerging advanced technologies for monitoring ulceration in patients with diabetes. The management of DFUs requires a multidisciplinary approach that involves patient education. It is well-established that poor glycemic control significantly contributes to diabetic foot ulcer complications, presenting global challenges in quality of life, economics, and resource allocation, affecting approximately half a billion people and potentially leading to lower limb amputation or mortality. Therefore, effective DFU management necessitates a multidisciplinary approach that includes patient education. However, current clinical guidelines for DFU treatment are not performing effectively, resulting in unnecessary increases in financial and emotional burden on patients. Researchers have experimented with advanced technologies and methods, including traditional approaches, to address complications related to DFU healing. This paper also presents the evolution of patents in the field of DFU medication and advanced diagnostic methods, showcasing relevant innovations that may benefit a wide range of researchers.

Nursing can effectively prevent and ameliorate diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). However, there is a lack of literature on the bibliometric analysis of DFU nursing. This study aimed to analyze the research hotspots and development trends in DFU nursing over the past 10 years to provide references for future related research.

The Web of Science Core Collection was used to retrieve literature related to DFU nursing from 2013 to 2023. Analyses included the annual publication trends; author, institution, and country collaborations; journal and literature co-citation; and keyword co-occurrence, clustering, and bursting, performed using CiteSpace 5.8 R3.

A total of 229 papers were included, showing an upward trend in annual publications. American scholar David G Armstrong (n = 3) and King's College Hospital London (n = 4) were the most productive authors and institutions, respectively. The United States ranked first (n = 45) in national contributions, followed by China and Brazil. The overall research strength between authors and institutions was relatively scattered, and intensive cooperation has not yet been formed. National collaborations resulted in a core team dominated by Europe and North America with concentrated research strengths. The most frequently co-cited journal and co-cited reference were Diabetes Care (111 citations) and Armstrong DG (2017) (131 citations), separately. Research hotspots mainly focused on risk assessment, classification systems, protective measures, and clinical management of DFU. "Primary care" and "intervention efficacy" were identified as the research trends in the coming years.

The field of DFU nursing requires more attention. Academic exchange and cooperation between authors, institutions, and countries should be strengthened. Our future research will focus on the latest hotspots and trends, conducting more in-depth and comprehensive studies on DFU management.

Wound classification systems are useful tools to characterise diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFU) and are utilised for the purpose of clinical assessment, to promote effective communication between health professionals, and to support clinical audit and benchmarking. Australian guidelines regarding wound classification in patients with DFU are outdated. We aimed to adapt existing international guidelines for wound classification to develop new evidence-based Australian guidelines for wound classification in people with diabetes and DFU.

Recommended NHRMC procedures were followed to adapt suitable International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidelines on wound classification to the Australian health context. Five IWGDF wound classification recommendations were evaluated and assessed according to the ADAPTE and GRADE systems. We compared our judgements with IWGDF judgements to decide if recommendations should be adopted, adapted or excluded in an Australian context. We re-evaluated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendation ratings, provided justifications for the recommendation and outlined any special considerations for implementation, subgroups, monitoring and future research in an Australian setting.

After the five recommendations from the IWGDF 2019 guidelines on the classification of DFUs were evaluated by the panel, two were adopted and three were adapted to be more suitable for Australia. The main reasons for adapting, were to align the recommendations to existing Australian standards of care, especially in specialist settings, to maintain consistency with existing recommendations for documentation, audit and benchmarking and to be more appropriate, acceptable and applicable to an Australian context. In Australia, we recommend the use of the SINBAD system as a minimum standard to document the characteristics of a DFU for the purposes of communication among health professionals and for regional/national/international audit. In contrast to the IWGDF who recommend against usage, in Australia we recommend caution in the use of existing wound classification systems to provide an individual prognosis for a person with diabetes and a foot ulcer.

We have developed new guidelines for wound classification for people with diabetes and a foot ulcer that are appropriate and applicable for use across diverse care settings and geographical locations in Australia.

The aim of this study was to investigate the factors involved in healing failure in a population of patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) after one year of follow-up.

One hundred and forty-four patients were treated for DFU in a tertiary-care center and had a regular follow-up for one year. Laboratory measurements and clinical assessments, including long-term diabetes complications and risk factors for DFU, were collected at baseline and patients were divided in two groups according to the outcome [Healed group (H, n = 91), and Not Healed group (NH, n = 53)].

Compared with H group, NH group had significant higher levels of urinary albumin excretion [H vs NH, median (IQR), 23.5 (10.1, 41.1) vs 26.4 (20.8, 141.1), P = 0.032] and significantly increased prevalence of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) (22% vs 40%, P = 0.038) and Charcot Arthropathy (3% vs 16%, P = 0.025). No differences among the other long-term complications of diabetes, risk factors for DFU or clinical features were found. The multiple logistic regression analysis identified DKD and Charcot Arthropathy as negative predictors of healing.

In a population of people with type 2 diabetes with DFU treated in a tertiary-care center, DKD and Charcot Arthropathy were related to poor healing within one year-follow-up.

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has been publishing evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. This publication represents a new guideline addressing the use of classifications of diabetic foot ulcers in routine clinical practice and reviews those which have been published. We only consider systems of classification used for active diabetic foot ulcers and do not include those that might be used to define risk of future ulceration. The guidelines are based on a review of the available literature and on expert opinion leading to the identification of eight key factors judged to contribute most to clinical outcomes. Classifications are graded on the number of key factors included as well as on internal and external validation and the use for which a classification is intended. Key factors judged to contribute to the scoring of classifications are of three types: patient related (end-stage renal failure), limb-related (peripheral artery disease and loss of protective sensation), and ulcer-related (area, depth, site, single, or multiple and infection). Particular systems considered for each of the following five clinical situations: (a) communication among health professionals, (b) predicting the outcome of an individual ulcer, (c) as an aid to clinical decision-making for an individual case, (d) assessment of a wound, with/without infection, and peripheral artery disease (assessment of perfusion and potential benefit from revascularisation), and (d) audit of outcome in local, regional, or national populations. We recommend: (a) for communication among health professionals the use of the SINBAD system (that includes Site, Ischaemia, Neuropathy, Bacterial Infection and Depth); (b) no existing classification for predicting outcome of an individual ulcer; (c) the Infectious Diseases Society of America/IWGDF (IDSA/IWGDF) classification for assessment of infection; (d) the WIfI (Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection) system for the assessment of perfusion and the likely benefit of revascularisation; and (e) the SINBAD classification for the audit of outcome of populations.

Classification and scoring systems can help both clinical management and audit outcomes of routine care. The aim of this study was to assess published systems of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) to determine which should be recommended for a given clinical purpose. Published classifications had to have been validated in populations of > 75% people with diabetes and a foot ulcer. Each study was assessed for internal and external validity and reliability. Eight key factors associated with failure to heal were identified from large clinical series and each classification was scored on the number of these key factors included. Classifications were then arranged according to their proposed purpose into one or more of four groups: (a) aid communication between health professionals, (b) predict clinical outcome of individual ulcers, (c) aid clinical management decision making for an individual case, and (d) audit to compare outcome in different populations. Thirty-seven classification systems were identified of which 18 were excluded for not being validated in a population of >75% DFUs. The included 19 classifications had different purposes and were derived from different populations. Only six were developed in multicentre studies, just 13 were externally validated, and very few had evaluated reliability.Classifications varied in the number (4 - 30), and definition of individual items and the diagnostic tools required. Clinical outcomes were not standardized but included ulcer-free survival, ulcer healing, hospitalization, limb amputation, mortality, and cost. Despite the limitations, there was sufficient evidence to make recommendations on the use of particular classifications for the indications listed above.

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a common complication of type-1 and type-2 diabetes. About 10-15% of patients with diabetes develop foot ulcers. A validated foot ulcer classification system that will support the development of treatment strategis is necessary for clinicians managing DFUs. More than 10 classification systems have been described by researchers. Another important aspect of the management of DFUs is the proper identification of causative pathogens that trigger infections. While conventional diagnostic methods, such as swabs, cultures and biopsies are more widely used, novel molecular techniques have been exploring bacterial identification and quantification. Knowledge of the microbial aetiologies in diabetic foot infections, and understanding of antibiotic resistance, is critical for the effective management and treatment of these infected wounds. Initial antibiotic regimens are usually selected empirically. A set of common principles may help avoid selecting either an unnecessarily broad or inappropriately narrow antibiotic treatment regimen. In this review we provide a comprehensive summary and description of classification systems of diabetic foot infections, and a comprehensive discussion of microbiology.

The diabetic foot is a complication of diabetes affecting 15% of diabetics in their lives. It is associated to diabetic neuropathy and peripheral vascular disease and its incidence has increased. The ulceration is the initial cause of a dramatic process leading, if not correctly treated, to amputations. Both neuropathy, neuro-ischemia and infections have a role in determining healing or worsening of the lesions and 85% of all amputations in diabetic patients are preceded by a foot ulceration deteriorating to a severe gangrene or infection. The different causative agents and the different clinical presentations of diabetic foot ask a multidisciplinary approach in order to address treatments to the final goals, the prevention of the amputations and the maintenance of a functional foot able with weight-bearing ability. Many professional figures, diabetologists, surgeons (both general and vascular and orthopedics), interventional radiologists, infectious diseases specialists, specialized nurses, podiatrists, orthotic technicians, are called to apply their knowledges to the diabetic patients affected by diabetic foot in a virtuous circle leading to reach the goals, with the imperative action of the multidisciplinary team. The so organized center will allow both a correct and rapid diagnosis, the use in ambulatorial environments of modern tools, or the hospitalization in multitasking wards, in which all the complications and the necessary treatments are possible, both in emergencies or in elective way, considering both revascularizations and surgery.

The challenges of modern wound management, such as the treatment of chronic wounds and their phase-specific handling, are demanding and require optimally adapted therapeutic measures. The principles of moist wound care as well as an adequate debridement have priority here. To support these necessary measures, different options are available, e.g., a new product group operating across several wound phases.

A new treatment principle in modern wound management based on an expert consensus is presented.

On the basis of clinical experience reports and published evidence, the current and new principles of wound treatment were discussed in a panel of experts and formulated as a consensus statement.

Enzyme alginogels represent a combination of agents that allow phase-specific wound care. They exhibit autolytic, absorbent, and antimicrobial properties and simultaneously cover three components of wound management based on the TIME framework. Thus, according to the experts, they differ from other wound healing products and can be classified in a distinct product group. Clinical studies, as well as clinical experiences, provide evidence for the efficacy of enzyme alginogels.

According to the experts, the potential of enzyme alginogels used considering the principles of moist wound care, comprises the three-fold effect (continuous and significantly simplified debridement, maintaining a moist wound environment and antimicrobial effect without cytotoxicity), the ease of use, and the flexible application. In addition, the flexibility of the product class regarding frequency of application, duration of treatment and combinability with secondary dressings, are of economic benefit in the health care sector.

We systematically review the available systems used to classify diabetic foot ulcers in order to synthesize their methodological qualitative issues and accuracy to predict lower extremity amputation, as this may represent a critical point in these patients' care.

Two investigators searched, in EBSCO, ISI, PubMed and SCOPUS databases, and independently selected studies published until May 2013 and reporting prognostic accuracy and/or reliability of specific systems for patients with diabetic foot ulcer in order to predict lower extremity amputation.

We included 25 studies reporting a prevalence of lower extremity amputation between 6% and 78%. Eight different diabetic foot ulcer descriptions and seven prognostic stratification classification systems were addressed with a variable (1-9) number of factors included, specially peripheral arterial disease (n = 12) or infection at the ulcer site (n = 10) or ulcer depth (n = 10). The Meggitt-Wagner, S(AD)SAD and Texas University Classification systems were the most extensively validated, whereas ten classifications were derived or validated only once. Reliability was reported in a single study, and accuracy measures were reported in five studies with another eight allowing their calculation. Pooled accuracy ranged from 0.65 (for gangrene) to 0.74 (for infection).

There are numerous classification systems for diabetic foot ulcer outcome prediction, but only few studies evaluated their reliability or external validity. Studies rarely validated several systems simultaneously and only a few reported accuracy measures. Further studies assessing reliability and accuracy of the available systems and their composing variables are needed.

Diabetic foot (DF) is a chronic and highly disabling complication of diabetes. The prevalence of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is high in diabetic patients and, associated or not with peripheral neuropathy (PN), can be found in 50% of cases of DF. It is worth pointing out that the number of major amputations in diabetic patients is still very high. Many PAD diabetic patients are not revascularised due to lack of technical expertise or, even worse, negative beliefs because of poor experience. This despite the progress obtained in the techniques of distal revascularisation that nowadays allow to reopen distal arteries of the leg and foot. Italy has one of the lowest prevalence rates of major amputations in Europe, and has a long tradition in the field of limb salvage by means of an aggressive approach in debridement, antibiotic therapy and distal revascularisation. Therefore, we believe it is appropriate to produce a consensus document concerning the treatment of PAD and limb salvage in diabetic patients, based on the Italian experience in this field, to share with the scientific community.

Diabetic foot ulceration is a serious complication of diabetes mellitus worldwide and the most common cause of hospitalization in diabetic patients. The etiology of diabetic foot ulcerations is complex due to their multifactorial nature. The pathophysiologies of diabetic foot ulceration with polyneuropathy and angiopathy as well as wound-healing impairment in patients with diabetes mellitus are important. Proper adherence to standard treatment strategies and interdisciplinary cooperation can reduce the--compared with European data--noticeably higher rates of major amputations in Germany.

Foot ulcers are a common and important complication of diabetes. Variation in the clinical presentation of this disease has resulted in a paucity of evidence from comparable studies to guide optimal clinical management. A validated scoring system might help clinicians and researchers in everyday assessment and management of patients or the development and assessment of new therapies. The aim of the present review was to critically appraise the published literature of wound scoring systems for diabetic foot ulcers.

An electronic search was performed using the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from 1966 until 2009 for scoring systems for diabetic foot ulcers. The literature review conformed to PRISMA statement standards.

The literature search identified 197 articles, of which 180 were excluded. Eleven scoring systems and six validation or comparative studies are described.

Many scoring systems exist for classification of the diabetic foot, few of which have been validated. Detailed scoring systems offer a valuable method for the comparison of data from different diabetic foot centres. Simplistic scoring systems may be used in clinical practice and the choice of scoring system should be determined by the population under study.

Diabetic foot ulcers affect millions of people in the United States of America and impose tremendous medical, psychosocial and financial loss or burden. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is generally well tolerated and appears to stimulate a robust granulation tissue response compared with other wound healing modalities. This device may be a cost-effective adjunctive wound healing therapy. This literature review will focus on the clinical outcome of diabetic foot ulcers treated with NPWT, its implication in the transition from acute care to home care, factors that might influence clinical outcomes in home care as well as quality-of-life aspects in these patients. Patient care for diabetic foot ulceration is complex and necessitates multiprofessional collaboration to provide comprehensive wound care. It is clear that when we strive for limb preservation in this most high-risk population, it is important to have an available versatile, efficacious wound healing modality. There is a need for an easy transition from acute care to home care. Resources need to be combined in a collaborative and synergistic fashion to allow patient to perform many daily living activities while receiving the potential benefits of an advanced wound healing modality.

To compare populations with and outcomes of diabetic foot ulcers managed in the U.K., Germany, Tanzania, and Pakistan and to explore the use of a new score of ulcer type in comparing outcomes among different countries.

Data from a series of 449 patients with diabetic foot ulcers managed in the U.K. were used to evaluate the new simplified system of classification and to derive an aggregate score. The use of the score was then explored using data from series managed in Germany (n = 239), Tanzania (n = 479), and Pakistan (n = 173).

A highly significant difference was found in time to healing between ulcers of increasing score in the U.K. series (Kruskal-Wallis test; P = 0). When data from all centers were examined, a step-up in days to healing was noted for those with scores of >or=3 (out of 6). Examination of baseline variables contributing to outcome revealed the following differences among centers: ischemia, ulcer area, and depth contributing to outcome in the U.K.; ischemia, area, depth, and infection in Germany; depth, infection, and neuropathy in Tanzania; and depth alone in Pakistan.

Any system of classification designed for general implementation must encompass all the variables that contribute to outcome in different communities. Adoption of a simple score based on these variables, the Site, Ischemia, Neuropathy, Bacterial Infection, and Depth (SINBAD) score, may prove useful in predicting ulcer outcome and enabling comparison among different centers.

The aim was to compare the use of four different systems of foot ulcer classification in a consecutive population with diabetes presenting to a specialist clinic in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Clinical data were collected prospectively in all patients presenting with foot ulcers between 3 January 2003 and 30 September 2005, and were used retrospectively to classify their ulcers using the Meggitt/Wagner, University of Texas (UT), Size (Area and Depth), Sepsis, Arteriopathy, and Denervation [S(AD)SAD] and Perfusion, Extent/size, Depth/tissue loss, Infection and Sensation (PEDIS) systems. Comparison was made between the strength of the associations between baseline characteristics of each system and outcome determined at 5 December 2005, using linear by linear association.

The strongest statistical associations (P < 0.001) were observed between percent healing and Wagner score (chi(2)= 85.923), depth [S(AD)SAD, PEDIS and UT grade, 70.558], infection [S(AD)SAD, 61.774; PEDIS, 37.924] and UT stage (32.929). Weaker but significant (P < 0.001) associations were observed between percent healing and neuropathy [S(AD)SAD, PEDIS 12.475] and peripheral arterial disease [S(AD)SAD, PEDIS 10.799], as well as cross-sectional area [S(AD)SAD 4.387, P = 0.036].

The strength of the statistical association between outcome and both neuropathy and infection contrasts with findings in series previously reported from the USA and UK, and highlights the differences which may be found in different populations. These differences have implications for any system of classification chosen to compare the effectiveness of management in different centres in different countries.

To provide an overview of the literature related to the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.

This continuing education activity is intended for physicians and nurses with an interest in wound care.

After reading this article and taking this test, the reader should be able to:

To aid clinicians in selecting the appropriate approach for treating patients with diabetic foot infections, we investigated whether any baseline clinical findings predicted an unfavourable clinical outcome. Using data from a large, prospective treatment trial of diabetic foot infections (SIDESTEP), we assessed the association between clinical treatment failure and baseline history, physical and laboratory findings, by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Among 402 patients clinically evaluable 10 days after completing antibiotic therapy, baseline factors significantly (P < 0.05) associated by univariate analysis with treatment failure were 'severe' (versus 'moderate') University of Texas (UT) wound grade; elevated white blood cell count, C-reactive protein or erythrocyte sedimentation rate; high wound severity score; inpatient treatment; low serum albumin; male sex; and skin temperature of affected foot >10 degrees C above that of unaffected foot. By multivariate logistic regression only severe UT wound grade (odds ratio 2.1) and elevated white blood cell count [odds ratio 1.7 for a 1 standard deviation (2971 cells/mm(3)) increase] remained statistically significant. Clinical failure rates were 46% for patients with both risk factors compared with 10% for patients with no risk factors and 16-17% for patients with one risk factor. Increased white blood cell count and severe UT wound grade at baseline, but not other features, were significant independent and additive risk factors for clinical failure in patients treated for a diabetic foot infection.

In this longitudinal study of 1666 persons with diabetes, there was an observed trend toward an increased risk for amputation (chi(2) test for trend, 108.0; P<.001), higher-level amputation (chi(2) test for trend, 113.3; P<.001), and lower extremity-related hospitalization (chi(2) test for trend, 118.6; P<.001) with increasing infection severity. The Infectious Diseases Society of America's foot infection classification system may be a useful tool for grading foot infections.

Diabetic foot ulcers are among the most common severe complications of diabetes, affecting up to 68 per 1,000 persons with diabetes per year in the United States. Over half of these patients develop an infection and 20% require some form of amputation during the course of their malady. The key risk factors of diabetic foot ulceration include neuropathy, deformity and repetitive stress (trauma). The key factors associated with non healing of diabetic foot wounds (and therefore amputation) include wound depth, presence of infection and presence of ischaemia. This manuscript will discuss these key risk factors and briefly outline steps for simple, evidence-based assessment of risk in this population.

This trial assessed whether a simple clinical tool can be used to stratify patients with diabetes, according to risk of developing foot ulceration. This was a prospective, observational follow-up study of 3526 patients with diabetes (91% type 2 diabetes) attending for routine diabetes care. Mean age was 64.7 (range 15-101) years and duration of diabetes was 8.8 (+/-1.5 SD) years. Patients were categorised into 'low' (64%), 'moderate' (23%) or 'high' (13%) risk of developing foot ulcers by trained staff using five clinical criteria during routine patient care. During follow-up (1.7 years), 166 (4.7%) patients developed an ulcer. Foot ulceration was 83 times more common in high risk and six times more in moderate risk, compared with low-risk patients. The negative predictive value of a 'low-risk score' was 99.6% (99.5-99.7%; 95% confidence interval). This clinical tool accurately predicted foot ulceration in routine practice and could be used direct scarce podiatry resources towards those at greatest need.

Ulceration of the foot in diabetes is common and disabling and frequently leads to amputation of the leg. Mortality is high and healed ulcers often recur. The pathogenesis of foot ulceration is complex, clinical presentation variable, and management requires early expert assessment. Interventions should be directed at infection, peripheral ischaemia, and abnormal pressure loading caused by peripheral neuropathy and limited joint mobility. Despite treatment, ulcers readily become chronic wounds. Diabetic foot ulcers have been neglected in health-care research and planning, and clinical practice is based more on opinion than scientific fact. Furthermore, the pathological processes are poorly understood and poorly taught and communication between the many specialties involved is disjointed and insensitive to the needs of patients.