Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a common complication of diabetes, characterized by chronic, hard-to-heal wounds that can lead to serious infections and amputations. Effective self-management is crucial for treatment and prevention.
Recent Advances:
A comprehensive literature search was conducted across academic databases, clinical practice guideline (CPG) databases, and the websites of diabetes societies. The characteristics, recommendations, and evaluation criteria of the CPGs were extracted and organized using Excel. Four researchers independently assessed the methodological and reporting quality of the CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II instrument and the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare checklist. Data were synthesized and visualized through evidence mapping to provide an overview of current guideline coverage and key recommendations.
Critical Issues:
This study included 13 CPGs and synthesized 46 recommendations. Self-management strategies for patients with DFU mainly involve health education, foot self-care, lifestyle change, comorbidity/symptom management, as well as follow-up and medical help-seeking. The identified CPGs were of mixed quality, with four classified as high quality. With respect to methodology, the CPGs performed well in scope and purpose (82.6%±10.9%) and clarity (80.77%±9.19%), but showed deficiencies in stakeholder involvement (52.8%; interquartile range [IQR]: 17.3%) and editorial independence (58.3%; IQR: 82.3%). For reporting quality, limitations were noted in transparency regarding review and quality assurance (18.75%; IQR: 100%), as well as funding and declaration of interests (12.5%; IQR: 32.82%).
Future Directions:
The evidence provided by CPGs for DFU self-management varied in strength, and some recommendations were inconsistent. The results adds to our knowledge and promotes the development of trustworthy CPGs on DFU. Further research is necessary to propose more evidence-based and high-quality recommendations.
McDermottK, FangM, BoultonAJM, et al.Etiology, epidemiology, and disparities in the burden of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care, 2023; 46(1):209–221.
2.
ArmstrongDG, BoultonAJM, BusSA. Diabetic foot ulcers and their recurrence. N Engl J Med, 2017; 376(24):2367–2375.
3.
Van NettenJJ, BusSA, ApelqvistJ, et al.; International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot. Definitions and criteria for diabetes‐related foot disease (IWGDF 2023 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2024; 40(3):e3654.
4.
PetersenBJ, Linde-ZwirbleWT, TanT-W, et al.Higher rates of all-cause mortality and resource utilization during episodes-of-care for diabetic foot ulceration. Diabetes Res Clin Pract, 2022; 184:109182.
5.
SkrepnekGH, MillsJLSr, ArmstrongDG. A diabetic emergency one million feet long: Disparities and burdens of illness among diabetic foot ulcer cases within emergency departments in the United States, 2006–2010. PLoS One, 2015; 10(8):e0134914.
6.
BehrendtC-A, SigvantB, SzeberinZ, et al.International variations in amputation practice–a Vascunet report. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2019; 58(6):e244–e5.
7.
ArmstrongDG, SwerdlowMA, ArmstrongAA, et al.Five year mortality and direct costs of care for people with diabetic foot complications are comparable to cancer. J Foot Ankle Res, 2020; 13:1–4.
8.
SchaperNC, van NettenJJ, ApelqvistJ, et al.; IWGDF Editorial Board. Practical guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetes‐related foot disease (IWGDF 2023 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2024; 40(3):e3657.
9.
BusSA, SaccoICN, Monteiro SoaresM, et al.Guidelines on the prevention of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2023 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2024; 40(3):e3651.
10.
PaiseyRB, AbbottA, LevensonR, et al.; South—West Cardiovascular Strategic Clinical Network peer diabetic foot service review team. Diabetes‐related major lower limb amputation incidence is strongly related to diabetic foot service provision and improves with enhancement of services: Peer review of the South‐West of England. Diabet Med, 2018; 35(1):53–62.
11.
Van HoutumWH. Barriers to the delivery of diabetic foot care. Lancet, 2005; 366(9498):1678–1679.
12.
TanT-W, CrockerRM, PalmerKNB, et al.A qualitative study of barriers to care-seeking for diabetic foot ulceration across multiple levels of the healthcare system. J Foot Ankle Res, 2022; 15(1):56.
13.
XiongC, HeY, ZhangY, et al.Relationship between illness perception and self‐management behaviors among Chinese diabetic foot patients. Jpn J Nurs Sci, 2023; 20(4):e12550.
14.
ZhuX, LeeES, LimPXH, et al.Exploring barriers and enablers of self‐management behaviours in patients with diabetic foot ulcers: A qualitative study from the perceptions of patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals in primary care. Int Wound J, 2023; 20(7):2764–2779.
15.
SteinbergE, GreenfieldS, WolmanDM, et al.Clinical Practice Guidelines we can Trust. National Academies Press: Washington, DC; 2011.
16.
TreweekS, OxmanAD, AldersonP, et al.Developing and evaluating communication strategies to support informed decisions and practice based on evidence (DECIDE): Protocol and preliminary results. Implement Sci, 2013; 8:1–12.
17.
LohrKN, FieldMJ. Clinical Practice Guidelines: Directions for a New Program. National Academies Press: Washington, DC; 1990.
18.
SunY, MaL, JiM, et al.Evidence map of recommendations on diabetic foot ulcers care: A systematic review of 22 guidelines. J Tissue Viability, 2022; 31(2):294–301.
19.
Miake-LyeIM, HempelS, ShanmanR, et al.What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products. Syst Rev, 2016; 5:28–21.
20.
PageMJ, McKenzieJE, BossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 2021; 372:n71.
21.
ZhuZ, HuY, XingWJ, et al.The composition of different types of evidence-based problems. J Nurses Train, 2017; 32(21):1991–1994.
22.
BrouwersMC, KhoME, BrowmanGP, et al.; AGREE Next Steps Consortium. AGREE II: Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. Cmaj, 2010; 182(18):E839–E42.
23.
ChenY, YangK, MarušićA, et al.; RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) Working Group. A reporting tool for practice guidelines in health care: The RIGHT statement. Ann Intern Med, 2017; 166(2):128–132.
24.
BartkoJJ. The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychol Rep, 1966; 19(1):3–11.
25.
JiangM, GuanW-J, FangZ-F, et al.A critical review of the quality of cough clinical practice guidelines. Chest, 2016; 150(4):777–788.
26.
Chinese Diabetes Society, Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases, Chinese Society for Tissue Repair and Regeneration. Chinese guideline on prevention and management of diabetic foot (2019 edition). Chin J Diabetes Mellit, 2019; 11(2):92–108.
27.
BonhamPA, BrunetteG, CrestodinaL, et al.2021 Guideline for management of patients with lower-extremity wounds due to diabetes mellitus and/or neuropathic disease. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs, 2022; 49(3):267–285.
28.
BonnetE, MaulinL, SennevilleE, et al.; individual members of the “Review group”. Clinical practice recommendations for infectious disease management of diabetic foot infection (DFI) – 2023 SPILF. Infect Dis Now, 2024; 54(1):104832.
29.
ConteMS, BradburyAW, KolhP, et al.; GVG Writing Group for the Joint Guidelines of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS), European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS), and World Federation of Vascular Societies (WFVS). Global vascular guidelines on the management of chronic limb-threatening ischemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2019; 58(1S):S1–S109.e33. +.
30.
DuarteEGJr, LopesCF, GaioF, et al.Brazilian society of angiology and vascular surgery 2023 guidelines on the diabetic foot. J Vasc Bras, 2024; 23:e20230087.
31.
EastJ, FergusonT, NewnhamMS, et al.Guidelines on management of the patient with diabetic foot infection. West Indian Med J, 2019; 68:18–25.
32.
ElSayedNA, AleppoG, BannuruRR, et al.; American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 12. Retinopathy, neuropathy, and foot care: Standards of care in diabetes—2024. Diabetes Care, 2024; 47(Supplement_1):S231–S243.
33.
GornikHL, AronowHD, GoodneyPP, et al.; Peer Review Committee Members. 2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the management of lower extremity peripheral artery disease. Circulation, 2024; 149(24):e1313–e410.
34.
KaminskiMR, GolledgeJ, LasschuitJWJ, et al.; Australian Diabetes-related Foot Disease Guidelines & Pathways Project. Australian guideline on prevention of foot ulceration: Part of the 2021 Australian evidence-based guidelines for diabetes-related foot disease. J Foot Ankle Res, 2022; 15(1):53.
WangA, LvG, ChengX, et al.Guidelines on multidisciplinary approaches for the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (2020 edition). Burns Trauma, 2020; 8:tkaa017.
37.
National Institute for H, Clinical E. Diabetic Foot Problems: Prevention and Management. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: London; 2023.
38.
SchaperNC, van NettenJJ, ApelqvistJ, et al.; IWGDF Editorial Board. Practical guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2020; 36 Suppl 1:e3266.
39.
GuyattGH, OxmanAD, VistGE, et al.; GRADE Working Group. GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Bmj, 2008; 336(7650):924–926.
40.
SackettDL. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest, 1986; 89(2 Suppl):2S–3S.
41.
CookDJ, GuyattGH, LaupacisA, et al.Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest, 1992; 102(4 Suppl):305S–311S.
42.
European Society of C. Recommendations for Guidelines Production. European Society of Cardiology: Sophia Antipolis; 2010.
43.
JacobsAK, KushnerFG, EttingerSM, et al.ACCF/AHA clinical practice guideline methodology summit report: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American heart association task force on practice guidelines. Circulation, 2013; 127(2):268–310.
44.
ChenP, VilorioNC, DhatariyaK, et al.Guidelines on interventions to enhance healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes (IWGDF 2023 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2024; 40(3):e3644.
45.
EverettE, MathioudakisN. Update on management of diabetic foot ulcers. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 2018; 1411(1):153–165.
46.
Van NettenJJ, RaspovicA, LaveryLA, et al.Prevention of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes at risk of ulceration: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2024; 40(3):e3652.
47.
AhmedS, BarwickA, ButterworthP, et al.Footwear and insole design features that reduce neuropathic plantar forefoot ulcer risk in people with diabetes: A systematic literature review. J Foot Ankle Res, 2020; 13(1):30–13.
48.
OkoduwaSIR, IgiriBE, TagangJI, et al.Therapeutic smart-footwear approach for management of neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers: Current challenges and focus for future perspective. Med Nov Technol Devices, 2024; 23:100311.
49.
MuellerMJ. Mobility advice to help prevent reulceration in diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev, 2020; 36 Suppl 1:e3259.
50.
JungSY, LeeMJ, LeeSY. Analysis of the relationship between lower leg muscle mass and preservation of lower extremity in patients with diabetic foot ulcer. Int J Low Extrem Wounds, 2023; 22(3):503–508.
51.
AagaardTV, MoeiniS, SkouST, et al.Benefits and harms of exercise therapy for patients with diabetic foot ulcers: A systematic review. Int J Low Extrem Wounds, 2022; 21(3):219–233.
52.
PrompersL, HuijbertsM, ApelqvistJ, et al.High prevalence of ischaemia, infection and serious comorbidity in patients with diabetic foot disease in Europe: Baseline results from the Eurodiale study. Diabetologia, 2007; 50(1):18–25.
53.
HobanC, SareenJ, HenriksenCA, et al.Mental health issues associated with foot complications of diabetes mellitus. Foot Ankle Surg, 2015; 21(1):49–55.
54.
AhmadA, AbujbaraM, JaddouH, et al.Anxiety and depression among adult patients with diabetic foot: Prevalence and associated factors. J Clin Med Res, 2018; 10(5):411–418.
55.
McGloinH, DevaneD, McIntoshCD, et al.Psychological interventions for treating foot ulcers, and preventing their recurrence, in people with diabetes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2021; 2(2):CD012835.
56.
FoongHF, KyawBM, UptonZ, et al.Facilitators and barriers of using digital technology for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: A qualitative systematic review. Int Wound J, 2020; 17(5):1266–1281.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
