Aim: A diabetes-related foot ulcer (DFU) is a major risk factor for lower-extremity amputation (LEA). To help clinicians predict the risk of LEA in people with DFU, the Diabetic Foot Risk Assessment (DIAFORA) system was developed but has never been externally validated.
Methods: In this study, 317 people presenting with a new DFU were included.
Introduction: The safety of antiviral agents in real-world clinical settings is crucial, as pre-marketing studies often do not capture all adverse events (AE). Active pharmacovigilance strategies are essential for detecting and characterising these AE comprehensively.
Objective: The aim of this study was to identify and characterise active pharmacovigilance strategies used in real-world clinical settings for patients under systemic antiviral agents, focusing on the frequency of AE and the clinical data sources used.
Few diseases globally require treatment from so many different disciplines as diabetes-related foot disease. At least 25 different professionals may be involved: casting technicians, dermatologists, diabetes (educator) nurses, diabetologists, dieticians, endocrinologists, general practitioners, human movement scientists, infectious diseases experts, microbiologists, nuclear medicine physicians, orthopaedic surgeons, orthotists, pedorthists, physical therapists, plastic surgeons, podiatric surgeons, podiatrists, prosthetists, psychologists, radiologists, social workers, tissue viability physicians, vascular surgeons, and wound care nurses. A shared vocabulary and shared treatment goals and recommendations are then essential.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIntroduction: In this podcast, we present the result of the 2023 scheduled update of the 2019 guidelines of the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) addressing the use of systems to classify foot ulcers in people with diabetes in routine clinical practice.
Methods: These guidelines were based on a systematic review of the available literature that identified 28 classifications addressed in 149 articles and, subsequently, expert opinion using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology. We first assessed the value of each system independently and, in the second stage, chose the best one or two to be used in each clinical scenario.