Search

AbstractBackground:Foot screening is one of the most effective means of preventing foot complications in diabetes. Therefore the aim of this study was to perform a screening program for people with type 2 diabetes at risk of foot complications.Methods:Physical examinations consisting of vascular, neurological, musculoskeletal, and dermatologic examinations were performed. We used a Semmes-Weinstein monofilament and a 128-Hz tuning fork to test peripheral neuropathy. The study population was categorized based on Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines into three groups of low, medium, and high risk for diabetes foot disease.Results:Of a total of 148 people with type 2 diabetes, 4.7% had an active foot ulcer, and 41.9% were classed as low risk, 40.6% as medium risk, and 12.8% as high risk.Conclusions:Considering the potential of developing risk of foot disease in people with diabetes, it is recommended that foot screening should be performed by primary care practitioners and specialists to detect foot disease in an early stage. Foot screening program for people with diabetes should also be taken into account by health policy makers in national guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractObjectives:To study the effects of the combination of 670 nm and 810 nm diode lasers on diabetic wound healing parameters in rats. Background:An alternative to traditional treatment modalities for diabetic ulcers is low-level laser therapy (LLLT). A number of published studies demonstrate the beneficial effects of LLLT, although several other studies also exist which indicate results to the contrary. Methods:Four groups were present in our study: Diabetic-laser (n = 5), Diabetic-control (n = 4), Nondiabetic-laser (n = 5) and Nondiabetic-control (n = 5) groups. Two intervention (laser) groups underwent low level laser therapy using 670 nm diode laser (500 mW, 10 J, 48 s) in the wound context, and 810 nm diode laser (250 mW, 12 J, 50 s) to the wound margins. The wound area was measured using computer software after digital microscopic photography on days 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 20, and 24. Results:There were no statistically significant differences between the diabetic and non-diabetic groups in the wound area, percentage of open wound area, and wound healing rate throughout the repeated measurements of the study. After seven days of low level laser therapy in the non-diabetic group, urine excretion was significantly increased in comparison with the control group. Conclusion:Overall, our study showed results of measured wound healing parameters that were not significantly different in the LLLT group compared with the control group. The urine volume increase in non-diabetic rats after LLLT was an incidental observation that warrants future study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]