TY - JOUR
T1 - Classification of foot ulcers in people with diabetes
T2 - A systematic review
AU - Monteiro-Soares, Matilde
AU - Hamilton, Emma J.
AU - Russell, David A.
AU - Srisawasdi, Gulapar
AU - Boyko, Edward J.
AU - Mills, Joseph L.
AU - Jeffcoate, William
AU - Game, Fran
N1 - Funding Information:
Several external international expert reviewers reviewed our clinical questions and valued the importance of the clinical outcomes. We would like to thank, by alphabetical order, Fermin Martinez‐de‐Jesús (Mexico), Kristien van Acker (Belgium), Maimona Mbaye (Senegal), Norina Gavan (Romania), Rui Carvalho (Portugal), Shigeo Kono (Japan), Simone McConnie (Barbados), Stephen Twigg (Australia), and Zahid Miyan (Pakistan). Two patient representatives (Jonathan Cohen (United Kingdom) and Rama Krishnan (India)) reviewed our clinical questions and valued the importance of the clinical outcomes for which we are grateful. We would also like to thank Byron Perrin for revising the final version of our document. Matilde Monteiro‐Soares' work was financed by national funds through FCT Fundação para a Ciência e a Technology, I.P., within the scope of the project “RISE ‐ LA/P/0053/2020. Emma J. Hamilton was supported by a Clinician Research Fellowship from the Raine Medical Research Foundation. David A. Russell was supported through an Advanced Fellowship from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR300633). VA Puget Sound supported Dr. Boyko's involvement in this work.
Funding Information:
Production of the 2023 IWGDF Guidelines was supported by unrestricted grants from Advanced Oxygen Therapy Inc., Essity, Mölnlycke, Reapplix, and Urgo Medical. These sponsors did not have any communication related to the systematic reviews of the literature or related to the guidelines with working group members during the writing of the guidelines and have not seen any guideline or guideline‐related document before publication. Full conflict of interest statements of all authors can be found online at www.iwgdfguidelines.org .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2024/3
Y1 - 2024/3
N2 - Background: Classification and scoring systems can help both clinical management and audit the outcomes of routine care. Aim: This study aimed to assess published systems used to characterise ulcers in people with diabetes to determine which should be recommended to (a) aid communication between health professionals, (b) predict clinical outcome of individual ulcers, (c) characterise people with infection and/or peripheral arterial disease, and (d) audit to compare outcomes in different populations. This systematic review is part of the process of developing the 2023 guidelines to classify foot ulcers from the International Working Group on Diabetic Foot. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science for articles published up to December 2021 which evaluated the association, accuracy or reliability of systems used to classify ulcers in people with diabetes. Published classifications had to have been validated in populations of >80% of people with diabetes and a foot ulcer. Results: We found 28 systems addressed in 149 studies. Overall, the certainty of the evidence for each classification was low or very low, with 19 (68%) of the classifications being assessed by ≤ 3 studies. The most frequently validated system was the one from Meggitt-Wagner, but the articles validating this system focused mainly on the association between the different grades and amputation. Clinical outcomes were not standardized but included ulcer-free survival, ulcer healing, hospitalisation, limb amputation, mortality, and cost. Conclusion: Despite the limitations, this systematic review provided sufficient evidence to support recommendations on the use of six particular systems in specific clinical scenarios.
AB - Background: Classification and scoring systems can help both clinical management and audit the outcomes of routine care. Aim: This study aimed to assess published systems used to characterise ulcers in people with diabetes to determine which should be recommended to (a) aid communication between health professionals, (b) predict clinical outcome of individual ulcers, (c) characterise people with infection and/or peripheral arterial disease, and (d) audit to compare outcomes in different populations. This systematic review is part of the process of developing the 2023 guidelines to classify foot ulcers from the International Working Group on Diabetic Foot. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science for articles published up to December 2021 which evaluated the association, accuracy or reliability of systems used to classify ulcers in people with diabetes. Published classifications had to have been validated in populations of >80% of people with diabetes and a foot ulcer. Results: We found 28 systems addressed in 149 studies. Overall, the certainty of the evidence for each classification was low or very low, with 19 (68%) of the classifications being assessed by ≤ 3 studies. The most frequently validated system was the one from Meggitt-Wagner, but the articles validating this system focused mainly on the association between the different grades and amputation. Clinical outcomes were not standardized but included ulcer-free survival, ulcer healing, hospitalisation, limb amputation, mortality, and cost. Conclusion: Despite the limitations, this systematic review provided sufficient evidence to support recommendations on the use of six particular systems in specific clinical scenarios.
KW - audit
KW - classification
KW - clinical decision-making
KW - Diabetes related foot ulcers
KW - outcome prediction
KW - professional communication
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85158011437&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/dmrr.3645
DO - 10.1002/dmrr.3645
M3 - Review article
C2 - 37132179
AN - SCOPUS:85158011437
SN - 1520-7552
VL - 40
JO - Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews
JF - Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews
IS - 3
M1 - e3645
ER -