Explore open access research and scholarly works from STORE - University of Staffordshire Online Repository

Advanced Search

A Critical Evaluation of Existing Diabetic Foot Screening Guidelines.

FORMOSA, Cynthia, Gatt, Alfred and CHOCKALINGAM, Nachiappan (2016) A Critical Evaluation of Existing Diabetic Foot Screening Guidelines. The review of diabetic studies : RDS, 13 (2-3). pp. 158-186. ISSN 1614-0575

[thumbnail of Formosa_original_RDS-2016_reprint 3511.pdf]
Preview
Text
Formosa_original_RDS-2016_reprint 3511.pdf - Publisher's typeset copy

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract or description

AIM

To evaluate critically the current guidelines for foot screening in patients with diabetes, and to examine their relevance in terms of advancement in clinical practice, improvement in technology, and change in socio-cultural structure.

METHODS

A structured literature search was conducted in Pubmed/Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Google between January 2011 and January 2015 using the keywords '(Diabetes) AND (Foot Screening) AND (Guidelines)'.

RESULTS

Ten complete diabetes foot screening guidelines were identified and selected for analysis. Six of them included the full-process guidelines recommended by the International Diabetes Federation. Evaluation of the existing diabetes foot screening guidelines showed substantial variability in terms of different evidence-based methods and grading systems to achieve targets, making it difficult to compare the guidelines. In some of the guidelines, it is unclear how the authors have derived the recommendations, i.e. on which study results they are based, making it difficult for the users to understand them.

CONCLUSIONS

Limitations of currently available guidelines and lack of evidence on which the guidelines are based are responsible for the current gaps between guidelines, standard clinical practice, and development of complications. For the development of standard recommendations and everyday clinical practice, it will be necessary to pay more attention to both the limitations of guidelines and the underlying evidence.

Item Type: Article
Faculty: School of Life Sciences and Education > Sport and Exercise
Depositing User: Nachiappan CHOCKALINGAM
Date Deposited: 23 Jun 2017 09:16
Last Modified: 24 Feb 2023 13:47
URI: https://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/id/eprint/3511

Actions (login required)

View Item
View Item