Dataset Information

Utilisation of the 2019 IWGDF diabetic foot infection guidelines to benchmark practice and improve the delivery of care in persons with diabetic foot infections.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To utilise the 2019 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) - diabetic foot infection (DFI) guidelines as an audit tool for clinical practice in patients with diabetes attending a High-Risk Foot Service.

Methods

Data from 93 consecutive patients were collected over a 19-month period in patients attending a High-Risk Foot Service. The diagnosis and management of each patient in the sample were compared against the 2019 IWGDF DFI guidelines, grouped into four categories: Diagnosis, Microbiology, Treatment of soft tissue infection, and Surgical treatment and osteomyelitis. Deficits in performance were recorded using the recommendations as a benchmark standard.

Results

There were 109 DFI events. Nineteen (63%) of the recommendations were met, 7 (24%) were partially met, and four (13%) recommendations were not met. Fourteen of the sample had no documented requests for full blood counts. Tissue was obtained for culture in 32 (29%) of the sample. No percutaneous bone biopsies were performed. Only 13 (28%) patients had intraoperative bone specimens sent for culture and sensitivities, with no bone specimens sent for histopathology. Modification of antibiotic therapy following available culture results was low, occurring in 12 out of 63 possible occasions (19%). The duration of antibiotic regimens in PEDIS 2 infections and osteomyelitis was greater than that recommended.

Conclusions

Utilising the IWGDF DFI guidelines to benchmark clinical practice is a useful tool to identify gaps in clinical performance or service delivery and may help to improve patient care.

SUBMITTER: Malone M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7842064 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Utilisation of the 2019 IWGDF diabetic foot infection guidelines to benchmark practice and improve the delivery of care in persons with diabetic foot infections.

Malone Matthew M Erasmus Adriaan A Schwarzer Saskia S Lau Namson S NS Ahmad Mehtab M Dickson Hugh G HG

Journal of foot and ankle research 20210128 1

<h4>Aims</h4>To utilise the 2019 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) - diabetic foot infection (DFI) guidelines as an audit tool for clinical practice in patients with diabetes attending a High-Risk Foot Service.<h4>Methods</h4>Data from 93 consecutive patients were collected over a 19-month period in patients attending a High-Risk Foot Service. The diagnosis and management of each patient in the sample were compared against the 2019 IWGDF DFI guidelines, grouped into four c ...[more]

PMID: 33509233

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the disparities in the outcomes of White, African American (AA) and non-AA minority (Hispanics and Native Americans (NA)), patients admitted in the hospitals with diabetic foot infections (DFIs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:The HCUP-Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2002 to 2015) was queried to identify patients who were admitted to the hospital for management of DFI using ICD-9 codes. Outcomes evaluated included minor and major amputations, open or endovascular revascularization, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Incidence for amputation and open or endovascular revascularization were evaluated over the study period. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess the association between race/ethnicity and outcomes. RESULTS:There were 150,701 admissions for DFI, including 98,361 Whites, 24,583 AAs, 24,472 Hispanics, and 1,654 Native Americans (NAs) in the study cohort. Overall, 45,278 (30%) underwent a minor amputation, 9,039 (6%) underwent a major amputation, 3,151 underwent an open bypass, and 8,689 had an endovascular procedure. There was a decreasing incidence in major amputations and an increasing incidence of minor amputations over the study period (P < .05). The risks for major amputation were significantly higher (all p<0.05) for AA (OR 1.4, 95%CI 1.4,1.5), Hispanic (OR 1.3, 95%CI 1.3,1.4), and NA (OR 1.5, 95%CI 1.2,1.8) patients with DFIs compared to White patients. Hispanics (OR 1.3, 95%CI 1.2,1.5) and AAs (OR 1.2, 95%CI 1.1,1.4) were more likely to receive endovascular intervention or open bypass than Whites (all p<0.05). NA patients with DFI were less likely to receive a revascularization procedure (OR 0.6, 95%CI 0.3, 0.9, p = 0.03) than Whites. The mean hospital length of stay (LOS) was significantly longer for AAs (9.2 days) and Hispanics (8.6 days) with DFIs compared to Whites (8.1 days, p<0.001). CONCLUSION:Despite a consistent incidence reduction of amputation over the past decade, racial and ethnic minorities including African American, Hispanic, and Native American patients admitted to hospitals with DFIs have a consistently significantly higher risk of major amputation and longer hospital length of stay than their White counterparts. Native Americans were less likely to receive revascularization procedures compared to other minorities despite exhibiting an elevated risk of an amputation. Further study is required to address and limit racial and ethnic disparities and to further promote equity in the treatment and outcomes of these at-risk patients.

Project description:Abstract Background Diabetic foot infections are a common precursor to lower extremity amputations. The treatment of diabetic foot infections involves both medical and surgical management, of which limb-sparing surgeries are increasingly preferred over amputations at or above the ankle to preserve mobility and quality of life. The outcomes following these limb-sparing surgeries are not well described. Methods This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study of 90 Veterans with moderate-to-severe diabetic foot infections between 2017 and 2019 from the Veterans Affairs Maryland Health Care System. The exposure was foot surgery with bone resection (ie, toe amputation, metatarsal resection, transmetatarsal amputation) vs debridement alone. The outcome was healing within 1 year. We used log-binomial regression to assess the association between foot surgery type and healing, stratify by infection location, and evaluate potential confounding variables. Results The cumulative incidence of healing after foot surgery with bone resection was greater than that following debridement (risk ratio [RR], 1.80 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.17–2.77]). This association was modified by infection location and greater for toe infections (RR, 4.52 [95% CI, 1.30–15.7]) than other foot infections (RR, 1.19 [95% CI, .69–2.02]). We found no evidence of confounding by comorbidities or infection severity. Conclusions For patients with toe infections, foot surgery with bone resection was associated with better healing than debridement alone. The multiple specialties caring for patients with diabetic foot infections need a stronger common knowledge base—from studies like this and future studies—to better counsel patients about their treatment and prognosis. For moderate-to-severe diabetic foot infections of the toe, we found that foot surgery with bone resection was associated with better healing than debridement. For infections of other parts of the foot, healing was similar between bone resection and debridement.

Dataset Information

Utilisation of the 2019 IWGDF diabetic foot infection guidelines to benchmark practice and improve the delivery of care in persons with diabetic foot infections.

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Utilisation of the 2019 IWGDF diabetic foot infection guidelines to benchmark practice and improve the delivery of care in persons with diabetic foot infections.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets