Search

A new diabetic foot evaluation scale was proposed, using the seven domains of depth, maceration, inflammation/infection, size, tissue type of the wound bed, type of wound edge, and tunneling/undermining. This scale was named "DMIST" as an acronym from the initials of the domains. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of DMIST. Secondary analysis was conducted in three investigations performed using the diabetic foot ulcer assessment scale (DFUAS) in Japan and Indonesia. Secondary analysis was assessed using DMIST, PUSH, and DESIGN for 4 weeks based on DFUAS score and photographs of diabetic foot ulcers by researchers. Concurrent validity was determined from the correlation of total DMIST scores with PUSH and DESIGN scores. Construct validity was determined by comparisons between total DMIST score and grade of the Wagner classification. Predictive validity was determined by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for wound non-healing 4 weeks later. Subjects comprised 35 Japanese patients and 118 Indonesian patients. Correlations of total DMIST score with PUSH and DESIGN scores were 0.831 and 0.822, respectively. Comparison of total DMIST scores with grade of the Wagner classification (Grade I vs. Grade II/III vs. Grade IV/V) was p < 0.001. Based on an area under the curve of 0.872, a DMIST score of 9 was selected as a cut-off, offering sensitivity of 0.855 and specificity of 0.786 for wound non-healing 4 weeks later. Our findings suggest that DMIST offers high validity., (© 2020 by the Wound Healing Society.)

Treatment for patients with chronic wounds is entering a new era, and autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is among the most promising treatments. PRP contains a concentration of platelets obtained by centrifuging the patient's blood. Because it contains fibrin and high concentrations of growth factors, PRP is known to promote wound healing. In this study, we present five patients with chronic foot ulcers successfully treated with PRP in our institution. The patients had various underlying diseases: diabetes (n = 2), peripheral arterial disease (n = 1), both diabetes and peripheral arterial disease (n = 1), and cutaneous polyarteritis nodosa (n = 1). Also, we provide a description of PRP's mechanisms, advantages, and limitations., (© 2015 Japanese Dermatological Association.)

Aims: To identify differences in the characteristics of patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) according to their etiological classification and to compare their healing time., Methods: Over a 4.5-year period, 73 patients with DFUs were recruited. DFUs were etiologically classified as being of neuropathic, ischemic, or neuro-ischemic origin. Descriptive analyses were performed to characterize study subjects, foot-related factors, and healing outcome and time. Duration of healing was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Healing time among the three types was compared using the log rank test., Results: The number of patients manifesting neuropathic, ischemic, and neuro-ischemic ulcers was 30, 20, and 14, respectively. Differences were identified for age, diabetes duration, body mass index, hypertension, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. Patients with neuro-ischemic ulcers had better ankle-brachial index, skin perfusion pressure (SPP), and transcutaneous oxygen pressure values compared to those with ischemic ulcers. The average time in which 50% of patients had healed wounds was 70, 113, and 233 days for neuropathic, neuro-ischemic, and ischemic ulcers, respectively. Main factors associated with healing were age and SPP values., Conclusions: Based on the etiological ulcer type, DFU healing course and several patient factors differed. Failure to consider the differences in DFU etiology may have led to heterogeneity of results in previous studies on DFUs., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

ABSTRACT We developed a new assessment tool for diabetic foot ulcers because no such tool specifically for diabetic foot ulcer exists. The diabetic foot ulcer assessment scale (DFUAS) has 11 domain items. The minimum and maximum scores on this scale are 0 and 98, respectively; higher scores indicate more severe wounds. The aim of this study was to evaluate the concurrent validity, construct validity and predictive validity of DFUAS in Indonesia. A prospective cohort study was conducted on patients with diabetic foot ulcer at Kitamura wound clinic in Indonesia. A total of 62 patients with 70 diabetic foot ulcers were assessed with DFUAS tool, Bates-Jensen wound assessment tool (BWAT), and pressure ulcer scale for healing (PUSH). Concurrent validity was determined by correlation of the DFUAS total score with the external criterion (BWAT, PUSH, and wound surface area). A comparison between the total DFUAS score and chronic wound status was made to determine construct validity. We also analyzed 41 wounds that were followed for 4 weeks to evaluate predictive validity. The correlation coefficient total scores of the DFUAS against the BWAT, PUSH, and wound surface area were 0.92, 0.87, and 0.82, respectively. The comparison of the total DFUAS score with chronic wound status was p < 0.001. The predictive validity test indicated that a DFUAS cutoff score of 12 produced the best balance of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value (89%, 71%, 86%, and 77%, respectively). In conclusion, the newly developed DFUAS is a valid tool for assessing diabetic foot ulcers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]