ContextAmong persons diagnosed as having diabetes mellitus, the prevalence
of foot ulcers is 4% to 10%, the annual population-based incidence is 1.0%
to 4.1%, and the lifetime incidence may be as high as 25%. These ulcers frequently
become infected, cause great morbidity, engender considerable financial costs,
and are the usual first step to lower extremity amputation.ObjectiveTo systematically review the evidence on the efficacy of methods advocated
for preventing diabetic foot ulcers in the primary care setting.Data Sources, Study Selection, and Data ExtractionThe EBSCO, MEDLINE, and the National Guideline Clearinghouse databases
were searched for articles published between January 1980 and April 2004 using
database-specific keywords. Bibliographies of retrieved articles were also
searched, along with the Cochrane Library and relevant Web sites. We reviewed
the retrieved literature for pertinent information, paying particular attention
to prospective cohort studies and randomized clinical trials.Data SynthesisPrevention of diabetic foot ulcers begins with screening for loss of
protective sensation, which is best accomplished in the primary care setting
with a brief history and the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament. Specialist clinics
may quantify neuropathy with biothesiometry, measure plantar foot pressure,
and assess lower extremity vascular status with Doppler ultrasound and ankle-brachial
blood pressure indices. These measurements, in conjunction with other findings
from the history and physical examination, enable clinicians to stratify patients
based on risk and to determine the type of intervention. Educating patients
about proper foot care and periodic foot examinations are effective interventions
to prevent ulceration. Other possibly effective clinical interventions include
optimizing glycemic control, smoking cessation, intensive podiatric care,
debridement of calluses, and certain types of prophylactic foot surgery. The
value of various types of prescription footwear for ulcer prevention is not
clear.ConclusionsSubstantial evidence supports screening all patients with diabetes to
identify those at risk for foot ulceration. These patients might benefit from
certain prophylactic interventions, including patient education, prescription
footwear, intensive podiatric care, and evaluation for surgical interventions.

/pdf/preventing-foot-ulcers-in-patients-with-diabetes-1mnv6pfu8d.pdf

Preventing Foot Ulcers in Patients With Diabetes

Objectives.This study evaluated the effectiveness (changes in health behaviors, health status, and health service utilization) of a self-management program for chronic disease designed for use with a heterogeneous group of chronic disease patients. It also explored the differential effectiveness of

https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1999MC.pdf

Evidence suggesting that a chronic disease self-management program can improve health status while reducing hospitalization: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To review reliability, validity, and normative data from 7 different studies, involving a total of 1,988 people with diabetes, and provide a revised version of the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA) measure. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The SDSCA measure is a brief self-report questionnaire of diabetes self-management that includes items assessing the following aspects of the diabetes regimen: general diet, specific diet, exercise, blood-glucose testing, foot care, and smoking. Normative data (means and SD), inter-item and test-retest reliability, correlations between the SDSCA subscales and a range of criterion measures, and sensitivity to change scores are presented for the 7 different studies (5 randomized interventions and 2 observational studies). RESULTS: Participants were typically older patients, having type 2 diabetes for a number of years, with a slight preponderance of women. The average inter-item correlations within scales were high (mean = 0.47), with the exception of specific diet; test-retest correlations were moderate (mean = 0.40). Correlations with other measures of diet and exercise generally supported the validity of the SDSCA subscales (mean = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: There are numerous benefits from standardization of measures across studies. The SDSCA questionnaire is a brief yet reliable and valid self-report measure of diabetes self-management that is useful both for research and practice. The revised version and its scoring are presented, and the inclusion of this measure in studies of diabetes self-management is recommended when appropriate.

https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/diacare/23/7/943.full.pdf

The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: results from 7 studies and a revised scale.

OBJECTIVE —To systematically review the effectiveness of self-management training in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS —MEDLINE, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Nursing and Allied Health databases were searched for English-language articles published between 1980 and 1999. Studies were original articles reporting the results of randomized controlled trials of the effectiveness of self-management training in people with type 2 diabetes. Relevant data on study design, population demographics, interventions, outcomes, methodological quality, and external validity were tabulated. Interventions were categorized based on educational focus (information, lifestyle behaviors, mechanical skills, and coping skills), and outcomes were classified as knowledge, attitudes, and self-care skills; lifestyle behaviors, psychological outcomes, and quality of life; glycemic control; cardiovascular disease risk factors; and economic measures and health service utilization. RESULTS —A total of 72 studies described in 84 articles were identified for this review. Positive effects of self-management training on knowledge, frequency and accuracy of self-monitoring of blood glucose, self-reported dietary habits, and glycemic control were demonstrated in studies with short follow-up ( CONCLUSIONS —Evidence supports the effectiveness of self-management training in type 2 diabetes, particularly in the short term. Further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of self-management interventions on sustained glycemic control, cardiovascular disease risk factors, and ultimately, microvascular and cardiovascular disease and quality of life.

/pdf/effectiveness-of-self-management-training-in-type-2-diabetes-soglcnmoad.pdf

Effectiveness of Self-Management Training in Type 2 Diabetes: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for cardiovascular disease in dialysis patients.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of a patient, health care provider, and systems intervention on the prevalence of risk factors for lower extremity amputation in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes. DESIGN Blinded, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING Academic general medicine practice. PARTICIPANTS Of the 395 patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes who underwent the initial patient assessment, 352 completed the study. INTERVENTION The 12-month intervention was multifaceted. Patients received foot-care education and entered into a behavioral contract for desired self-foot care, which was reinforced through telephone and postcard reminders. Health care providers were given practice guidelines and informational flow sheets on foot-related risk factors for amputation in diabetic patients. In addition, the folders for intervention patients had special identifiers that prompted health care providers to: 1) ask that patients remove their footwear, 2) perform foot examinations, and 3) provide foot-care education. RESULTS Patients receiving the intervention were less likely than control patients to have serious foot lesions (baseline prevalence, 2.9%; odds ratio, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.16 to 1.00]; P = 0.05) and other dermatologic abnormalities. Also, they were more likely to report appropriate self-foot-care behaviors, to have foot examinations during office visits (68% compared with 28%; P < 0.001), and to receive foot-care education from health care providers (42% compared with 18%; P < 0.001). Physicians assigned to intervention patients were more likely than physicians assigned to control patients to examine patients' feet for ulcers, pulses, and abnormal dermatologic conditions and to refer patients to the podiatry clinic (10.6% compared with 5.0%; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS An intervention designed to reduce risk factors for lower extremity amputations positively affected patient self-foot-care behavior as well as the foot care given by health care providers and reduced the prevalence of lower extremity clinical disease in patients with diabetes.

Reduction of Lower Extremity Clinical Abnormalities in Patients with Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Traditionally, continuing medical education (CME) programs do not address the changes in the organization of a practice necessary to implement new care strategies. We developed a continuing medical education program that included a structured method, termed environmental optimizing, to help primary care physicians implement intensified management strategies for insulin-requiring patients with diabetes mellitus. To evaluate this approach, 88 physicians and 126 of their non-obese, insulin-requiring patients were surveyed and interviewed pre-program and at six and twelve months post-program. The results suggest that this approach to CME resulted in a significant number of physicians adopting the program recommendations. Specifically, there was a significant increase in the use of: 1) multiple daily insulin regimens (p=.01), 2) a program-specific “tracer” insulin regimen (p=.001), 3) the use of HbAl assays to adjust insulin (p<.05), diet and exercise regimens (p<.05), and 4) patients' self monitoring behavior (p<.01). The results of this study suggest that incorporating environmental optimizing into CME curricula may enhance the adoption of program recommendations.

Carl D. Langefeld

Papers

Reduction of Lower Extremity Clinical Abnormalities in Patients with Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Increasing the Use of Intensified Management of Diabetes: An Education Program for Physicians.