Search

Appropriate assessment and management of diabetes-related foot ulcers (DRFUs) is essential to reduce amputation risk. Management requires debridement, wound dressing, pressure off-loading, good glycaemic control and potentially antibiotic therapy and vascular intervention. As a minimum, all DRFUs should be managed by a doctor and a podiatrist and/or wound care nurse. Health professionals unable to provide appropriate care for people with DRFUs should promptly refer individuals to professionals with the requisite knowledge and skills. Indicators for immediate referral to an emergency department or multidisciplinary foot care team (MFCT) include gangrene, limb-threatening ischaemia, deep ulcers (bone, joint or tendon in the wound base), ascending cellulitis, systemic symptoms of infection and abscesses. Referral to an MFCT should occur if there is lack of wound progress after 4 weeks of appropriate treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore consultation patterns, management practices, and costs of foot, ankle, and leg problems in Australian primary care., Study Design: We analyzed data from the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health program, April 2000 to March 2016. Foot, ankle, and leg problems were identified using the International Classification of Primary Care, Version 2 PLUS terminology. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics examining general practitioner (GP) and patient characteristics associated with a foot, ankle, or leg problem being managed. Cost to government was estimated by extracting fees for GP consultations, diagnostic imaging, and pathology services from the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) database. Costs for prescription-only medicines were extracted from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule and for nonprescribed medications, large banner discount pharmacy prices were used., Results: GPs recorded 1,568,100 patient encounters, at which 50,877 foot, ankle, or leg problems were managed at a rate of 3.24 (95% confidence intervals [CIs] 3.21-3.28) per 100 encounters. The management rate of foot, ankle, or leg problems was higher for certain patient characteristics (older, having a health care card, socioeconomically disadvantaged, non-Indigenous, and being English speaking) and GP characteristics (male sex, older age, and Australian graduate). The most frequently used management practice was the use of medications. The average cost (Australian dollars) per encounter was A$52, with the total annual cost estimated at A$256m., Conclusions: Foot, ankle, and leg problems are frequently managed by GPs, and the costs associated with their management represent a substantial economic impact in Australian primary care., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Introduction: Minor amputation is commonly needed to treat diabetes-related foot disease (DFD). Remoteness of residence is known to limit access to healthcare and has previously been associated with poor outcomes. The primary aim of this study was to examine the associations between ethnicity and remoteness of residency with the risk of major amputation and death following initial treatment of DFD by minor amputation. A secondary aim was to identify risk factors for major amputation and death following minor amputation to treat DFD., Research Design and Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of data from patients who required a minor amputation to treat DFD between 2000 and 2019 at a regional tertiary hospital in Queensland, Australia. Baseline characteristics were collected together with remoteness of residence and ethnicity. Remoteness was classified according to the 2019 Modified Monash Model (MMM) system. Ethnicity was based on self-identification as an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander or non-Indigenous person. The outcomes of major amputation, repeat minor amputation and death were examined using Cox-proportional hazard analyses., Results: A total of 534 participants were included, with 306 (57.3%) residing in metropolitan or regional centres, 228 (42.7%) in rural and remote communities and 144 (27.0%) were Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people. During a median (inter quartile range) follow-up of 4.0 (2.1-7.6) years, 103 participants (19.3%) had major amputation, 230 (43.1%) had repeat minor amputation and 250 (46.8%) died. The risks (hazard ratio [95% CI]) of major amputation and death were not significantly higher in participants residing in rural and remote areas (0.97, 0.67-1.47; and 0.98, 0.76-1.26) or in Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people (HR 1.44, 95% CI 0.96, 2.16 and HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67, 1.18). Ischemic heart disease (IHD), peripheral artery disease (PAD), osteomyelitis and foot ulceration (p<0.001 in all instances) were independent risk factors for major amputation., Conclusion: Major amputation and death are common following minor amputation to treat DFD and people with IHD, PAD and osteomyelitis have an increased risk of major amputation. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People and residents of remote areas were not at excess risk of major amputation., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Alahakoon et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) is a leading cause of the Australian and global disease burdens and requires proportionate volumes of research to address. Bibliometric analyses are rigorous methods for exploring total research publications in a field to help identify volume trends, gaps and emerging areas of need. This bibliometric review aimed to explore the volume, authors, institutions, journals, collaborating countries, research types and funding sources of Australian publications investigating DFD over 50 years., Methods: A systematic search of the Scopus ® database was conducted by two independent authors to identify all Australian DFD literature published between 1970 and 2023. Bibliometric meta-data were extracted from Scopus ® , analyzed in Biblioshiny, an R Statistical Software interface, and publication volumes, authors, institutions, journals and collaborative countries were described. Publications were also categorised for research type and funding source., Results: Overall, 332 eligible publications were included. Publication volume increased steadily over time, with largest volumes (78%) and a 7-fold increase over the last decade. Mean co-authors per publication was 5.6, mean journal impact factor was 2.9 and median citation was 9 (IQR2-24). Most frequent authors were Peter Lazzarini (14%), Vivienne Chuter (8%) and Jonathon Golledge (7%). Most frequent institutions affiliated were Queensland University Technology (33%), University Sydney (30%) and James Cook University (25%). Most frequent journals published in were Journal Foot and Ankle Research (17%), Diabetic Medicine (7%), Journal Diabetes and its Complications (4%) and International Wound Journal (4%). Most frequent collaborating countries were the United Kingdom (9%), the Netherlands (6%) and the United States (5%). Leading research types were etiology (38%), treatment evaluation (25%) and health services research (13%). Leading funding sources were no funding (60%), internal institution (16%) and industry/philanthropic/international (10%)., Conclusions: Australian DFD research increased steadily until more dramatic increases were seen over the past decade. Most research received no funding and mainly investigated etiology, existing treatments or health services. Australian DFD researchers appear to be very productive, particularly in recent times, despite minimal funding indicating their resilience. However, if the field is to continue to rapidly grow and address the very large national DFD burden, much more research funding is needed in Australia, especially targeting prevention and clinical trials of new treatments in DFD., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Podiatry Association and The Royal College of Podiatry.)

Reducing high mechanical stress is imperative to heal diabetes-related foot ulcers. We explored the association of cumulative plantar tissue stress (CPTS) and plantar foot ulcer healing, and the feasibility of measuring CPTS, in two prospective cohort studies (Australia (AU) and The Netherlands (NL)). Both studies used multiple sensors to measure factors to determine CPTS: plantar pressures, weight-bearing activities, and adherence to offloading treatments, with thermal stress response also measured to estimate shear stress in the AU-study. The primary outcome was ulcer healing at 12 weeks. Twenty-five participants were recruited: 13 in the AU-study and 12 in the NL-study. CPTS data were complete for five participants (38%) at baseline and one (8%) during follow-up in the AU-study, and one (8%) at baseline and zero (0%) during follow-up in the NL-study. Reasons for low completion at baseline were technical issues (AU-study: 31%, NL-study: 50%), non-adherent participants (15% and 8%) or combinations (15% and 33%); and at follow-up refusal of participants (62% and 25%). These underpowered findings showed that CPTS was non-significantly lower in people who healed compared with non-healed people (457 [117; 727], 679 [312; 1327] MPa·s/day). Current feasibility of CPTS seems low, given technical challenges and non-adherence, which may reflect the burden of treating diabetes-related foot ulcers.

In this podcast the lead authors of the 2023 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guideline on offloading treatments for diabetes-related foot ulcers briefly discuss why we need offloading treatments for people with diabetes-related foot ulcers, what the new international offloading guideline recommends, and where offloading treatment might go into the future.A podcast audio is available with this article., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Multiple disciplines are involved in the management of diabetes-related foot disease and a common vocabulary is essential for clear communication. Based on the systematic reviews of the literature that form the basis of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) Guidelines, the IWGDF has developed a set of definitions and criteria for diabetes-related foot disease. This document describes the 2023 update of these definitions and criteria. We suggest these definitions be used consistently in both clinical practice and research, to facilitate clear communication with people with diabetes-related foot disease and between professionals around the world., (© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The 1989 Saint Vincent Declaration established a goal of halving global diabetes-related amputation rates. A generation later, this goal has been achieved for major but not minor amputations. However, diabetic foot disease (DFD) is not only a leading cause of global amputation but also of hospitalisation, poor quality of life (QoL) and disability burdens. In this paper, we review latest estimates on the global disease burden of DFD and the next generation care of DFD that could reduce this burden. We found DFD causes 2% of the global disease burden. This makes DFD the 13 th largest of 350+ leading conditions causing the global disease burden, and much larger than dementia, breast cancer and type 1 diabetes. Neuropathy without ulcers and amputations makes up the largest portion of the global DFD burden yet receives the least DFD focus. Future care focussed on improving safe physical activity in people with DFD could considerably reduce the DFD burden, as this incorporates increasing physical fitness and QoL, while simultaneously decreasing ulceration and other risks. Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy is more prevalent than previously thought. Most cases respond well to non-removable offloading devices, but surgical intervention may further reduce the considerable burden of these neuropathic fracture dislocations. Ischaemia is becoming more common and complex. Most cases respond well to revascularisation interventions, but novel revascularisation techniques, medical management and autologous cell therapies may hold the key to more cases responding in the future. We conclude that DFD causes a global disease burden larger than most conditions and existing guideline-based care and next generation treatments can reduce this burden. We suggest the World Health Organization and International Diabetes Federation declare a new goal: halving the global DFD burden from 2% to 1% within the next generation., (© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Offloading treatment is crucial to heal diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFU). This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of offloading interventions for people with DFU., Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and trials registries for all studies relating to offloading interventions in people with DFU to address 14 clinical question comparisons. Outcomes included ulcers healed, plantar pressure, weight-bearing activity, adherence, new lesions, falls, infections, amputations, quality of life, costs, cost-effectiveness, balance, and sustained healing. Included controlled studies were independently assessed for risk of bias and had key data extracted. Meta-analyses were performed when outcome data from studies could be pooled. Evidence statements were developed using the GRADE approach when outcome data existed., Results: From 19,923 studies screened, 194 eligible studies were identified (47 controlled, 147 non-controlled), 35 meta-analyses performed, and 128 evidence statements developed. We found non-removable offloading devices likely increase ulcers healed compared to removable offloading devices (risk ratio [RR] 1.24, 95% CI 1.09-1.41; N = 14, n = 1083), and may increase adherence, cost-effectiveness and decrease infections, but may increase new lesions. Removable knee-high offloading devices may make little difference to ulcers healed compared to removable ankle-high offloading devices (RR 1.00, 0.86-1.16; N = 6, n = 439), but may decrease plantar pressure and adherence. Any offloading device may increase ulcers healed (RR 1.39, 0.89-2.18; N = 5, n = 235) and cost-effectiveness compared to therapeutic footwear and may decrease plantar pressure and infections. Digital flexor tenotomies with offloading devices likely increase ulcers healed (RR 2.43, 1.05-5.59; N = 1, n = 16) and sustained healing compared to devices alone, and may decrease plantar pressure and infections, but may increase new transfer lesions. Achilles tendon lengthening with offloading devices likely increase ulcers healed (RR 1.10, 0.97-1.27; N = 1, n = 64) and sustained healing compared to devices alone, but likely increase new heel ulcers., Conclusions: Non-removable offloading devices are likely superior to all other offloading interventions to heal most plantar DFU. Digital flexor tenotomies and Achilles tendon lengthening in combination with offloading devices are likely superior for some specific plantar DFU locations. Otherwise, any offloading device is probably superior to therapeutic footwear and other non-surgical offloading interventions to heal most plantar DFU. However, all these interventions have low-to-moderate certainty of evidence supporting their outcomes and more high-quality trials are needed to improve our certainty for the effectiveness of most offloading interventions., (© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: Offloading mechanical tissue stress is arguably the most important of multiple interventions needed to heal diabetes-related foot ulcers. This is the 2023 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) evidence-based guideline on offloading interventions to promote healing of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes. It serves as an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline., Materials and Methods: We followed the GRADE approach by devising clinical questions and important outcomes in the PICO (Patient-Intervention-Control-Outcome) format, undertaking a systematic review and meta-analyses, developing summary of judgement tables and writing recommendations and rationales for each question. Each recommendation is based on the evidence found in the systematic review, expert opinion where evidence was not available, and a careful weighing of GRADE summary of judgement items including desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, patient values, resources required, cost effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and acceptability., Results: For healing a neuropathic plantar forefoot or midfoot ulcer in a person with diabetes, use a non-removable knee-high offloading device as the first-choice offloading intervention. If contraindications or patient intolerance to non-removable offloading exist, consider using a removable knee-high or ankle-high offloading device as the second-choice offloading intervention. If no offloading devices are available, consider using appropriately fitting footwear combined with felted foam as the third-choice offloading intervention. If such a non-surgical offloading treatment fails to heal a plantar forefoot ulcer, consider an Achilles tendon lengthening, metatarsal head resection, joint arthroplasty, or metatarsal osteotomy. For healing a neuropathic plantar or apex lesser digit ulcer secondary to flexibile toe deformity, use digital flexor tendon tenotomy. For healing rearfoot, non-plantar or ulcers complicated with infection or ischaemia, further recommendations have been outlined. All recommendations have been summarised in an offloading clinical pathway to help facilitate the implementation of this guideline into clinical practice., Conclusion: These offloading guideline recommendations should help healthcare professionals provide the best care and outcomes for persons with diabetes-related foot ulcers and reduce the person's risk of infection, hospitalisation and amputation., (© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: Diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFU) are a leading cause of infection, hospitalisation and amputation. However, to our knowledge no studies have compared the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of people with DFU that were infected, hospitalised or amputated. This study aimed to investigate and compare the HRQoL of different groups of people with healed, non-infected, infected, hospitalised, or amputated DFU., Methods: This was a multi-centre cross-sectional study measuring the HRQoL of patients, attending one of 18 Diabetic Foot Services across Queensland, Australia, with one of five DFU health states: healed, non-infected, infected, hospitalised, amputated. HRQoL was measured using the EQ-5D-5L to estimate age-sex adjusted utility values., Results: Of 376 included patients (mean age 63 (12) years, 75% male), age-sex adjusted HRQoL utility estimates (95% CIs) were: healed DFU 0.57 (0.51-0.64), non-infected DFU 0.55 (0.49-0.62), infected DFU 0.45 (0.36-0.55), hospitalised DFU 0.53 (0.42-0.64), and amputated DFU 0.55 (0.46-0.63)., Conclusion: People in any DFU health state have considerably reduced HRQoL, with greatest reductions in those with infected DFU. These findings provide valuable HRQoL estimates and comparisons for several different important DFU health states, adding to our understanding of the impact of DFU on HRQoL and facilitating future economic evaluations., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) - foot ulcers, infection, ischaemia - is a leading cause of hospitalisation, disability, and health care costs in Australia. The previous 2011 Australian guideline for DFD was outdated. We developed new Australian evidence-based guidelines for DFD by systematically adapting suitable international guidelines to the Australian context using the ADAPTE and GRADE approaches recommended by the NHMRC., Main Recommendations: This article summarises the most relevant of the 98 recommendations made across six new guidelines for the general medical audience, including: prevention - screening, education, self-care, footwear, and treatments to prevent DFD; classification - classifications systems for ulcers, infection, ischaemia and auditing; peripheral artery disease (PAD) - examinations and imaging for diagnosis, severity classification, and treatments; infection - examinations, cultures, imaging and inflammatory markers for diagnosis, severity classification, and treatments; offloading - pressure offloading treatments for different ulcer types and locations; and wound healing - debridement, wound dressing selection principles and wound treatments for non-healing ulcers., Changes in Management as a Result of the Guideline: For people without DFD, key changes include using a new risk stratification system for screening, categorising risk and managing people at increased risk of DFD. For those categorised at increased risk of DFD, more specific self-monitoring, footwear prescription, surgical treatments, and activity management practices to prevent DFD have been recommended. For people with DFD, key changes include using new ulcer, infection and PAD classification systems for assessing, documenting and communicating DFD severity. These systems also inform more specific PAD, infection, pressure offloading, and wound healing management recommendations to resolve DFD., (© 2023 The Authors. Medical Journal of Australia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of AMPCo Pty Ltd.)

Background: Given the importance of preventive care for the lower limb in people with diabetes, and the absence of local guidelines in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ), the aim of this study was to determine the alignment of assessment and management used in the prevention of diabetes-related foot disease by NZ podiatrists to the international prevention guideline recommendations., Methods: A 37-item web-based survey was developed using a 5-point Likert scale (0 = always; 5 = never) based on the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) 2019 prevention guidelines and included domains on participant demographics, sector, caseloads, guidelines, screening, management, education, and referral. The survey was distributed to NZ podiatrists through the NZ podiatry association and social media. Participants completing > 50% of items were included. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to examine differences between sector subgroups., Results: Seventy-seven responses (16.3% of the NZ podiatry workforce) were received, of which 52 completed > 50% of items and were included. Of those 52 podiatrists, 73% were from the private sector. Public sector podiatrists reported higher weekly caseloads of patients with diabetes (p = 0.03) and foot ulcers (p < 0.001). The New Zealand Society for the Study of Diabetes (NZSSD) risk stratification pathway and IWGDF guidelines were the two most frequently utilised guidance documents. Participants reported median scores of at least "often" (< 2) for all items in the assessment and management, inspection, examination, and education provision domains for people with a high-risk foot. More than 50% of respondents reported screening more frequently than guideline recommendations for people with a very low to moderate risk foot. Structured education program was only used by 4 (5%) participants. Public sector podiatrists reported greater provision of custom-made footwear (p = 0.04) and multi-disciplinary team care (p = 0.03)., Conclusion: NZ podiatrists generally follow international guideline recommendations with respect to screening, self-care education, appropriate footwear, and treatment of risk factors for people at-risk of diabetes-related foot disease. However there may be over-screening of people with very low to medium risk occurring in clinical practice. Increasing access to integrated healthcare, custom-made footwear and structured educational programmes appear to be areas of practice that could be developed in future to help prevent diabetes-related foot disease in NZ., (© 2023. The College of Podiatry and the Australasian Podiatry Council.)

Adherence to using offloading treatment is crucial to healing diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFUs). Offloading adherence is recommended to be measured using objective monitors. However, self-reported adherence is commonly used and has unknown validity and reliability. This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of self-reported adherence to using removable cast walker (RCW) offloading treatment among people with DFUs. Fifty-three participants with DFUs using RCWs were included. Each participant self-reported their percentage adherence to using their RCW of total daily steps. Participants also had adherence objectively measured using dual activity monitors. After one week, a subset of 19 participants again self-reported their percentage adherence to investigate test-retest reliability. Validity was tested using Pearson's r and Bland-Altman tests, and reliability using Cohen's kappa. Median (IQR) self-reported adherence was greater than objectively measured adherence (90% (60-100) vs. 35% (19-47), p < 0.01). There was fair agreement (r = 0.46; p < 0.01) and large 95% limits of agreement with significant proportional bias (β = 0.46, p < 0.01) for validity, and minimal agreement for test-retest reliability (K = 0.36; p < 0.01). The validity and reliability of self-reported offloading adherence in people with DFU are fair at best. People with DFU significantly overestimate their offloading adherence. Clinicians and researchers should instead use objective adherence measures.

People with diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFUs) need to perform self-care consistently over many months to promote healing and to mitigate risks of hospitalisation and amputation. However, during that time, improvement in their DFU can be hard to detect. Hence, there is a need for an accessible method to self-monitor DFUs at home. We developed a new mobile phone app, "MyFootCare", to self-monitor DFU healing progression from photos of the foot. The aim of this study is to evaluate the engagement and perceived value of MyFootCare for people with a plantar DFU over 3 months' duration. Data are collected through app log data and semi-structured interviews (weeks 0, 3, and 12) and analysed through descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Ten out of 12 participants perceive MyFootCare as valuable to monitor progress and to reflect on events that affected self-care, and seven participants see it as potentially valuable to enhance consultations. Three app engagement patterns emerge: continuous, temporary, and failed engagement. These patterns highlight enablers for self-monitoring (such as having MyFootCare installed on the participant's phone) and barriers (such as usability issues and lack of healing progress). We conclude that while many people with DFUs perceive app-based self-monitoring as valuable, actual engagement can be achieved for some but not for all people because of various facilitators and barriers. Further research should target improving usability, accuracy and sharing with healthcare professionals and test clinical outcomes when using the app.

Aims/hypothesis: Diabetic foot disease (DFD) is a leading cause of hospital admissions and amputations. Global trends in diabetes-related amputations have been previously reviewed, but trends in hospital admissions for multiple other DFD conditions have not. This review analysed the published incidence of hospital admissions for DFD conditions (ulceration, infection, peripheral artery disease [PAD], neuropathy) and diabetes-related amputations (minor and major) in nationally representative populations., Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched for peer-reviewed publications between 1 January 2001 and 5 May 2022 using the terms 'diabetes', 'DFD', 'amputation', 'incidence' and 'nation'. Search results were screened and publications reporting the incidence of hospital admissions for a DFD condition or a diabetes-related amputation among a population representative of a country were included. Key data were extracted from included publications and initial rates, end rates and relative trends over time summarised using medians (ranges)., Results: Of 2527 publications identified, 71 met the eligibility criteria, reporting admission rates for 27 countries (93% high-income countries). Of the included publications, 14 reported on DFD and 66 reported on amputation (nine reported both). The median (range) incidence of admissions per 1000 person-years with diabetes was 16.3 (8.4-36.6) for DFD conditions (5.1 [1.3-7.6] for ulceration; 5.6 [3.8-9.0] for infection; 2.5 [0.9-3.1] for PAD) and 3.1 (1.4-10.3) for amputations (1.2 [0.2-4.2] for major; 1.6 [0.3-4.3] for minor). The proportions of the reported populations with decreasing, stable and increasing admission trends were 80%, 20% and 0% for DFD conditions (50%, 0% and 50% for ulceration; 50%, 17% and 33% for infection; 67%, 0% and 33% for PAD) and 80%, 7% and 13% for amputations (80%, 17% and 3% for major; 52%, 15% and 33% for minor), respectively., Conclusions/interpretation: These findings suggest that hospital admission rates for all DFD conditions are considerably higher than those for amputations alone and, thus, the more common practice of reporting admission rates only for amputations may substantially underestimate the burden of DFD. While major amputation rates appear to be largely decreasing, this is not the case for hospital admissions for DFD conditions or minor amputation in many populations. However, true global conclusions are limited because of a lack of consistent definitions used to identify admission rates for DFD conditions and amputations, alongside a lack of data from low- and middle-income countries. We recommend that these areas are addressed in future studies., Registration: This review was registered in the Open Science Framework database ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/4TZFJ )., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Aims: Patients' adherence to using knee-high offloading treatment is critical to effective healing of diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFUs). Previous studies have found that patients generally have low adherence to using removable knee-high offloading treatments, yet no study has investigated whether their adherence differs during daytime and nighttime. This study aimed to investigate the levels and factors associated with adherence to using knee-high removable cast walker (RCW) treatment during daytime and nighttime weight-bearing activities in people with DFUs., Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data collected from a multi-centre cross-sectional study investigating adherence to using knee-high RCWs among 57 participants with DFUs. All participants had multiple socio-demographic, physiological and psychosocial factors collected, before having their adherence to using RCWs during weight-bearing activity monitored over a 1-week period using the dual activity monitor method. Adherence data were categorised into daytime (06:00-18:00) and nighttime (18:00-06:00) periods and calculated separately. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors associated with daytime and nighttime adherence., Results: Mean adherence to using RCW during weight-bearing activities in people with DFUs was higher during daytime compared with nighttime [39.9% (SD = 18.9) versus 20.4% (SD = 16.7), p  < 0.001]. Factors independently associated with lower adherence during daytime were being male, longer diabetes duration, not having peripheral artery disease (PAD), and higher perceived RCW heaviness. Factors associated with lower adherence during nighttime were higher mean daytime steps, not having retinopathy and having dyslipidaemia., Conclusions: Adherence to using RCWs during weight-bearing activities reduced significantly at nighttime compared with daytime among people with DFUs, and this was associated with different factors. Interventions to improve adherence, in research and clinical practice, should incorporate methods to target daytime or nighttime adherence specifically., Competing Interests: AA had worked as a clinician at the NCDEG and this may be regarded as a potential conflict of interest. Otherwise, the authors declare no other relevant conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Aims: The provision of guideline-based care for patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFU) in clinical practice is suboptimal. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of higher rates of guideline-based care, compared with current practice., Methods: The costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with current practice (30% of patients receiving guideline-based care) were compared with seven hypothetical scenarios with increasing proportion of guideline-based care (40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90% and 100%). Comparisons were made using discrete event simulations reflecting the natural history of DFU over a 3-year time horizon from the Australian healthcare perspective. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated for each scenario and compared to a willingness-to-pay of AUD 28,000 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to incorporate joint parameter uncertainty., Results: All seven scenarios with higher rates of guideline-based care were likely cheaper and more effective than current practice. Increased proportions compared with current practice resulted in between AUD 0.28 and 1.84 million in cost savings and 11-56 additional QALYs per 1000 patients. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that the finding is robust to parameter uncertainty., Conclusions: Higher proportions of patients receiving guideline-based care are less costly and improve patient outcomes. Strategies to increase the proportion of patients receiving guideline-based care are warranted., (© 2022 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.)

People at risk for diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) often misunderstand why foot ulcers develop and what self-care strategies may help prevent them. The etiology of DFU is complex and difficult to communicate to patients, which may hinder effective self-care. Thus, we propose a simplified model of DFU etiology and prevention to aid communication with patients. The Fragile Feet & Trivial Trauma model focuses on two broad sets of risk factors: predisposing and precipitating. Predisposing risk factors (eg, neuropathy, angiopathy, and foot deformity) are usually lifelong and result in "fragile feet." Precipitating risk factors are usually different forms of everyday trauma (eg, mechanical, thermal, and chemical) and can be summarized as "trivial trauma." We suggest that the clinician consider discussing this model with their patient in three steps: 1) explain how a patient's specific predisposing risk factors result in fragile feet for the rest of life, 2) explain how specific risk factors in a patient's environment can be the trivial trauma that triggers development of a DFU, and 3) discuss and agree on with the patient measures to reduce the fragility of the feet (eg, vascular surgery) and prevent trivial trauma (eg, wear therapeutic footwear). By this, the model supports the communication of two essential messages: that patients may have a lifelong risk of ulceration but that there are health-care interventions and self-care practices that can reduce these risks. The Fragile Feet & Trivial Trauma model is a promising tool for aiding communication of foot ulcer etiology to patients. Future studies should investigate whether using the model results in improved patient understanding and self-care and, in turn, contributes to lower ulceration rates.

Background: Non-removable knee-high devices are the gold-standard offloading treatments to heal plantar diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). These devices are underused in practice for a variety of reasons. Recommending these devices for all patients, regardless of their circumstances and preferences influencing their ability to tolerate the devices, does not seem a fruitful approach., Purpose: The aim of this article is to explore the potential implications of a more personalized approach to offloading DFUs and suggest avenues for future research and development., Methods: Non-removable knee-high devices effectively heal plantar DFUs by reducing plantar pressure and shear at the DFU, reducing weight-bearing activity and enforcing high adherence. We propose that future offloading devices should be developed that aim to optimize these mechanisms according to each individual's needs. We suggest three different approaches may be developed to achieve such personalized offloading treatment. First, we suggest modular devices, where different mechanical features (rocker-bottom sole, knee-high cast walls/struts, etc.) can be added or removed from the device to accommodate different patients' needs and the evolving needs of the patient throughout the treatment period. Second, advanced manufacturing techniques and novel materials could be used to personalize the design of their devices, thereby improving common hindrances to their use, such as devices being heavy, bulky, and hot. Third, sensors could be used to provide real-time feedback to patients and clinicians on plantar pressures, shear, weight-bearing activity, and adherence., Conclusions: By the use of these approaches, we could provide patients with personalized devices to optimize plantar tissue stress, thereby improving clinical outcomes.

Aim: To determine trends in the incidence of hospitalizations and amputations for diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) in Australia., Methods: We included 70,766 people with type 1, and 1,087,706 with type 2 diabetes from the Australian diabetes registry from 2010 to 2019, linked to hospital admissions databases. Trends in age-adjusted incidence were summarized as annual percent changes (APC)., Results: In people with type 1 diabetes, total DFD hospitalizations increased from 20.8 to 30.5 per 1,000 person-years between 2010 and 2019 (APC: 5.1% (95% CI: 3.5, 6.8)), including increases for ulceration (13.3% (2.9, 24.7)), osteomyelitis (5.6% (2.7, 8.7)), peripheral arterial disease (7.7% (3.7, 11.9)), and neuropathy (8.7% (5.5, 12.0)). In people with type 2 diabetes, DFD hospitalizations changed from 18.6 to 24.8 per 1,000 person-years between 2010 and 2019 (APC: 4.5% (3.6, 5.4); 2012-2019), including increases for ulceration (8.7% (4.0, 13.7)), cellulitis (5.4% (3.7, 7.0)), osteomyelitis (6.7% (5.7, 7.7)), and neuropathy (6.9% (5.2, 8.5)). Amputations were stable in type 1, whereas in type 2, above knee amputations decreased (-6.0% (-9.1, -2.7). Adjustment for diabetes duration attenuated the magnitude of most increases, but many remained significant., Conclusions: DFD hospitalizations increased markedly in Australia, mainly driven by ulceration and neuropathy, highlighting the importance of managing DFD to prevent hospitalizations., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To perform an updated systematic review of randomised controlled trials examining the efficacy of at-home foot temperature monitoring in reducing the risk of a diabetes-related foot ulcer (DFU)., Methods: Systematic review performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Risk-of-bias was assessed using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analyses were performed using random effect models. Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses and a sub-analysis excluding trials considered at high risk-of-bias assessed the consistency of the findings. The certainty of the evidence was assessed with GRADE., Results: Five randomised controlled trials involving 772 participants meeting the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) risk category 2 or 3 were included. All trials reported instructing participants to measure skin temperature at-home at six or more sites on each foot using a hand-held infra-red thermometer at least daily and reduce ambulatory activity in response to hotspots (temperature differences >2.2°C on two consecutive days between similar locations in both feet). One, one, and three trials were considered at low, moderate and high risk-of-bias, respectively. Participants allocated to at-home foot temperature monitoring had a reduced risk of developing a DFU (relative risk 0.51, 95% CI 0.31-0.84) compared to controls. Sensitivity and sub-analyses suggested that the significance of this finding was consistent. The GRADE assessment suggested a low degree of certainty in the finding., Conclusions: At-home daily foot temperature monitoring and reduction of ambulatory activity in response to hotspots reduce the risk of a DFU in moderate or high risk people with a low level of certainty., (© 2022 The Authors. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Diabetes presents significant self-care challenges that require sustained motivation. Motivational Interviewing (MI) has substantial support in enhancing motivation for behavioural change, but its effective application in routine healthcare requires practitioners to acquire and use related skills. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the impact of MI training on MI-related skills of practitioners who provide diabetes healthcare. PubMed, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched using the terms motivational interviewing, motivation enhancement, and diabetes. Two assessors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts for papers reporting the impact of MI training on diabetes healthcare practitioners' outcomes. Of 625 abstracts screened, 22 papers from 17 unique studies were included. All 17 studies reported some improvement in MI skills, with 14 finding improvements in more than 50% and three less than 35%. However, the risk of bias and outcome measures varied widely between studies. All studies showed diabetes healthcare practitioners acquired and applied MI skills post-training, to varying levels. Findings suggest training should include education, role play, and ongoing supervision to maintain skills.

Aim: We evaluated the associations of age and duration of type 2 diabetes with major diabetes-related complications., Methods: We included 1.1 million people with type 2 diabetes from the Australian diabetes registry, followed from 2010 to 2019. We estimated the incidence of hospitalization or death from myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and heart failure (HF), and hospitalisation for lower extremity amputation (LEA); end-stage kidney disease (ESKD; kidney replacement therapy or death from ESKD); and all-cause mortality. Poisson regression was used to model incidence by attained age, age at diabetes diagnosis, and duration of diabetes., Results: Risk for complications increased exponentially with diabetes duration. Effects of attained age differed for each complication: age was a strong risk factor for MI, stroke, HF, and mortality, while diabetes duration, not age, was the predominant determinant of LEA and ESKD. At a given age, a 10-year longer diabetes duration was associated with a 1.1-1.5-fold increased risk of stroke and mortality, a 1.5-2.0-fold increased risk of MI and HF, and a 2-4-fold increased risk of LEA and ESKD., Conclusions: Duration of diabetes is a stronger risk factor for ESKD and LEA than it is for cardiovascular disease or mortality., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To explore children's foot, ankle and leg consultation patterns and management practices in Australian primary care., Design: Cross-sectional, retrospective study., Setting: Australia Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health program dataset., Participants: Data were extracted for general practitioners (GPs) and patients < 18 years from April 2000 to March 2016 inclusive., Main Outcome Measures: Demographic characteristics: sex, GP age groups (ie, <45, 45-54, 55+ years), GP country of training, patient age grouping (0-4, 5-9, 10-14, 15-18 years), postcode, concession card status, indigenous status, up to three patient encounter reasons, up to four encounter problems/diagnoses and the clinical management actioned by the GP., Results: Children's foot, ankle or leg problems were managed at a rate of 2.05 (95% CI 1.99 to 2.11) per 100 encounters during 229 137 GP encounters with children. There was a significant increase in the rate of foot, ankle and leg problems managed per 100 children in the population, from 6.1 (95% CI 5.3 to 6.8) in 2005-2006 to 9.0 (95% CI 7.9 to 10.1) in 2015-2016. Management of children's foot, ankle and leg problems were independently associated with male patients (30% more than female), older children (15-18 years were 7.1 times more than <1 years), male GPs (13% more) and younger GPs (<45 years of age 13% more than 55+). The top four most frequently managed problems were injuries (755.9 per 100 000 encounters), infections (458.2), dermatological conditions (299.4) and unspecified pain (176.3). The most frequently managed problems differed according to age grouping., Conclusions: Children commonly present to GPs for foot, ankle and leg problems. Presentation frequencies varied according to age. Unexpectedly, conditions presenting commonly in adults, but rarely in children, were also frequently recorded. This data highlights the importance of initiatives supporting contemporary primary care knowledge of diagnoses and management of paediatric lower limb problems to minimise childhood burden of disease., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Diabetes-related foot ulceration (DFU) has a substantial burden on both individuals and healthcare systems both globally and in Australia. There is a pressing need for updated guidelines on wound healing interventions to improve outcomes for people living with DFU. A national expert panel was convened to develop new Australian evidence-based guidelines on wound healing interventions for people with DFU by adapting suitable international guidelines to the Australian context., Methods: The panel followed National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) procedures to adapt suitable international guidelines by the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) to the Australian context. The panel systematically screened, assessed and judged all IWGDF wound healing recommendations using ADAPTE and GRADE frameworks for adapting guidelines to decide which recommendations should be adopted, adapted or excluded in the Australian context. Each recommendation had their wording, quality of evidence, and strength of recommendation re-evaluated, plus rationale, justifications and implementation considerations provided for the Australian context. This guideline underwent public consultation, further revision and approval by ten national peak bodies., Results: Thirteen IWGDF wound healing recommendations were evaluated in this process. After screening, nine recommendations were adopted and four were adapted after full assessment. Two recommendations had their strength of recommendations downgraded, one intervention was not currently approved for use in Australia, one intervention specified the need to obtain informed consent to be acceptable in Australia, and another was reworded to clarify best standard of care. Overall, five wound healing interventions have been recommended as having the evidence-based potential to improve wound healing in specific types of DFU when used in conjunction with other best standards of DFU care, including sucrose-octasulfate impregnated dressing, systemic hyperbaric oxygen therapy, negative pressure wound therapy, placental-derived products, and the autologous combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin dressing. The six new guidelines and the full protocol can be found at: https://diabetesfeetaustralia.org/new-guidelines/ CONCLUSIONS: The IWGDF guideline for wound healing interventions has been adapted to suit the Australian context, and in particular for geographically remote and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This new national wound healing guideline, endorsed by ten national peak bodies, also highlights important considerations for implementation, monitoring, and future research priorities in Australia., (© 2022. Diabetes Feet Australia.)

Background: Pressure offloading treatment is critical for healing diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFU). Yet the 2011 Australian DFU guidelines regarding offloading treatment are outdated. A national expert panel aimed to develop a new Australian guideline on offloading treatment for people with DFU by adapting international guidelines that have been assessed as suitable to adapt to the Australian context., Methods: National Health and Medical Research Council procedures were used to adapt suitable International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidelines to the Australian context. We systematically screened, assessed and judged all IWGDF offloading recommendations using best practice ADAPTE and GRADE frameworks to decide which recommendations should be adopted, adapted or excluded in the Australian context. For each recommendation, we re-evaluated the wording, quality of evidence, strength of recommendation, and provided rationale, justifications and implementation considerations, including for geographically remote and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. This guideline, along with five accompanying Australian DFU guidelines, underwent public consultation, further revision and approval by ten national peak bodies (professional organisations)., Results: Of the 13 original IWGDF offloading treatment recommendations, we adopted four and adapted nine. The main reasons for adapting the IWGDF recommendations included differences in quality of evidence ratings and clarification of the intervention(s) and control treatment(s) in the recommendations for the Australian context. For Australians with plantar DFU, we recommend a step-down offloading treatment approach based on their contraindications and tolerance. We strongly recommend non-removable knee-high offloading devices as first-line treatment, removable knee-high offloading devices as second-line, removable ankle-high offloading devices third-line, and medical grade footwear as last-line. We recommend considering using felted foam in combination with the chosen offloading device or footwear to further reduce plantar pressure. If offloading device options fail to heal a person with plantar DFU, we recommend considering various surgical offloading procedures. For people with non-plantar DFU, depending on the type and location of the DFU, we recommend using a removable offloading device, felted foam, toe spacers or orthoses, or medical grade footwear. The six new guidelines and the full protocol can be found at: https://diabetesfeetaustralia.org/new-guidelines/ ., Conclusions: We have developed a new Australian evidence-based guideline on offloading treatment for people with DFU that has been endorsed by ten key national peak bodies. Health professionals implementing these offloading recommendations in Australia should produce better DFU healing outcomes for their patients, communities, and country., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) is a leading cause of the Australian disease burden. The 2011 Australian DFD guidelines were outdated. We aimed to develop methodology for systematically adapting suitable international guidelines to the Australian context to become the new Australian evidence-based guidelines for DFD., Methods: We followed the Australian National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) guidelines for adapting guidelines. We systematically searched for all international DFD guideline records. All identified records were independently screened and assessed for eligibility. Those deemed eligible were further assessed and included if scoring at least moderate quality, suitability and currency using AGREE II and NHMRC instruments. The included international guidelines had all recommendations extracted into six sub-fields: prevention, wound classification, peripheral artery disease, infection, offloading and wound healing. Six national panels, each comprising 6-8 multidisciplinary national experts, screened all recommendations within their sub-field for acceptability and applicability in Australia using an ADAPTE form. Where panels were unsure of any acceptability and applicability items, full assessments were undertaken using a GRADE Evidence to Decision tool. Recommendations were adopted, adapted, or excluded, based on the agreement between the panel's and international guideline's judgements. Each panel drafted a guideline that included all their recommendations, rationale, justifications, and implementation considerations. All underwent public consultation, final revision, and approval by national peak bodies., Results: We screened 182 identified records, assessed 24 full text records, and after further quality, suitability, and currency assessment, one record was deemed a suitable international guideline, the International Working Group Diabetic Foot Guidelines (IWGDF guidelines). The six panels collectively assessed 100 IWGDF recommendations, with 71 being adopted, 27 adapted, and two excluded for the Australian context. We received 47 public consultation responses with > 80% (strongly) agreeing that the guidelines should be approved, and ten national peak bodies endorsed the final six guidelines. The six guidelines and this protocol can be found at: https://www.diabetesfeetaustralia.org/new-guidelines/ CONCLUSION: New Australian evidence-based guidelines for DFD have been developed for the first time in a decade by adapting suitable international guidelines. The methodology developed for adaptation may be useful for other foot-related conditions. These new guidelines will now serve as the national multidisciplinary best practice standards of DFD care in Australia., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: To determine trends in the incidence of major diabetes-related complications in Australia., Research Design and Methods: This study included 70,885 people with type 1 and 1,089,270 people with type 2 diabetes registered on the Australian diabetes registry followed from July 2010 to June 2019. Outcomes (hospitalization for myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, heart failure [HF], lower-extremity amputation [LEA], hypoglycemia, and hyperglycemia) were obtained via linkage to hospital admissions databases. Trends over time in the age-adjusted incidence of hospitalizations were analyzed using joinpoint regression and summarized as annual percent changes (APCs)., Results: In type 1 diabetes, the incidence of all complications remained stable, except for stroke, which increased from 2010-2011 to 2018-2019 (financial years; APC: +2.5% [95% CI 0.1, 4.8]), and hyperglycemia, which increased from 2010-2011 to 2016-2017 (APC: +2.7% [1.0, 4.5]). In type 2 diabetes, the incidence of stroke remained stable, while the incidence of MI decreased from 2012-2013 to 2018-2019 (APC: -1.7% [95% CI -2.8, -0.5]), as did the incidence of HF and hypoglycemia from 2010-2011 to 2018-2019 (APCs: -0.8% [-1.5, 0.0] and -5.3% [-6.7, -3.9], respectively); the incidence of LEA and hyperglycemia increased (APCs: +3.1% [1.9, 4.4], and +7.4% [5.9, 9.0]). Most trends were consistent by sex, but differed by age; in type 2 diabetes most improvements were confined to individuals aged ≥60 years., Conclusions: Trends in admissions for diabetes-related complications were largely stable in type 1 diabetes. In type 2 diabetes, hospitalization rates for MI, HF, and hypoglycemia fell over time, while increasing for LEA and hyperglycemia., (© 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Aims: To investigate factors independently associated with time-to-(being)-ulcer-free, time-varying effects and predict adjusted ulcer-free probabilities, in a large prospective cohort with diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFU) followed-up for 24 months., Methods: Patients presenting with DFU(s) to 65 Diabetic Foot Services across Queensland, Australia, between July-2011 and December-2017 were included. Demographic, comorbidity, limb, ulcer, and treatment factors were captured at presentation. Patients were followed-up until ulcer-free (all DFU(s) healed), amputation, death or two years. Factors associated with time-to-ulcer-free were investigated using both Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric survival models to explore time-varying effects and plot predicted adjusted ulcer-free probability graphs., Results: Of 4,709 included patients (median age 63 years, 69.5% male), median time-to-ulcer-free was 112 days (IQR:40->730), with 68.4% ulcer-free within two years. Factors independently associated with longer time-to-ulcer-free were each year of age younger than 60 years, living in a regional or remote area, smoking, neuropathy, peripheral artery disease (PAD), ulcer size >1 cm 2 , deep ulcer and mild infection (all p < 0.05). Time-varying effects were found for PAD and ulcer size limiting their association to six months only. Shorter time-to-ulcer-free was associated with recent DFU treatment by a podiatrist and receiving knee-high offloading treatment (both p < 0.05). Predicted adjusted ulcer-free probability graphs reported largest differences in time-to-ulcer-free over 24-months for geographical remoteness and PAD factors., Conclusions: Multiple factors predicted longer and shorter time-to-ulcer-free in people presenting with DFUs. Considering these factors, their time-varying effects and adjusted ulcer-free probability graphs, should aid the prediction of the likely time-to-(being)-ulcer-free for DFU patients., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Adherence to using knee-high offloading treatment is critical for healing diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFUs). However, few studies have investigated patients' adherence to using knee-high offloading treatment. We aimed to investigate the levels and factors associated with adherence to using knee-high removable cast walker (RCW) treatment among patients with DFUs., Research Design and Methods: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, we investigated adherence to using knee-high RCWs in 57 participants with DFUs. All participants were clinically examined for multiple sociodemographic, physiological, and psychosocial factors. Each participant's adherence level to using RCWs was then objectively measured using dual activity monitors (attached to the wrist and RCW) over a 1-week period. Multiple linear regression was undertaken to determine those factors independently associated with adherence levels., Results: The mean adherence level to using RCWs was 33.6% (SD 16.5) of weight-bearing activity. Factors independently associated with lower adherence levels were being male, longer diabetes duration, not having peripheral artery disease (PAD), and having higher perceived RCW heaviness (p≤0.05). No associations were found with psychosocial factors., Conclusions: Patients with DFUs adhered to using their RCWs on average for only a third of their prescribed weight-bearing treatment duration. Factors linked to lower RCW adherence levels were being male, longer diabetes duration, not having PAD, and perceived heavier RCWs. These findings highlight the importance of using gold standard non-removable knee-high offloading device treatment. Furthermore, these findings suggest, when gold standard devices are containdicated, that these factors be considered when prescribing the second choice RCW offloading treatment to optimise adherence. Regardless, further longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these factors., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Diabetes-related foot disease is a large cause of the global disease burden yet receives very little research funding to address this large burden. To help address this gap, it is recommended to first identify the consensus priority research questions of relevant stakeholders, yet this has not been performed for diabetes-related foot disease. The aim of this study was to determine the national top 10 priority research questions for diabetes-related foot health and disease from relevant Australian stakeholders., Research Design and Methods: A modified three-round Delphi online survey design was used to seek opinions from relevant Australian stakeholders including those with diabetes or diabetes-related foot disease or their carers (consumers), health professionals, researchers and industry. Participants were recruited via multiple public invitations and invited to propose three research questions of most importance to them (Round 1), prioritize their 10 most important questions from all proposed questions (Round 2), and then rank questions in order of importance (Round 3)., Results: After Round 1, a total of 226 unique questions were proposed by 210 participants (including 121 health professionals and 72 consumers). Of those participants, 95 completed Round 2 and 69 completed Round 3. The top 10 priority research questions covered a range of topics, including health economics, peripheral neuropathy, education, infection, technology, exercise, and nutrition. Consumers prioritized peripheral neuropathy and prevention-related questions. Health professionals prioritized management-related questions including Australia's First Peoples foot health, health economics and infection questions., Conclusions: These priority research questions should guide future national research agendas, funding and projects to improve diabetes-related foot disease burdens in Australia and globally. Future research should focus on consumer priority research questions to improve the burden of diabetes-related foot disease on patients and nations. Further research should also investigate reasons for different priorities between consumers and health professionals., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) are a leading cause of the global disease burden. Most DFUs are caused, and prolonged, by high plantar tissue stress under the insensate foot of a person with peripheral neuropathy. Multiple different offloading treatments have been used to try to reduce high plantar tissue stress and heal DFUs, including bedrest, casting, offloading devices, footwear, and surgical procedures. The best offloading treatments are those that balance the benefits of maximizing reductions in high plantar tissue stress, whilst reducing the risks of poor satisfaction, high costs and potential adverse events outcomes. This review aimed to summarize the best available evidence on the effects of offloading treatments to heal people with DFUs, plus review their use in clinical practice, the common barriers and solutions to using these treatments, and discuss promising emerging solutions that may improve offloading treatments in future. Findings demonstrate that knee-high offloading devices, non-removable or removable knee-high devices worn for all weight-bearing activities, are the gold standard offloading treatments to heal most patients with DFU, as they are much more effective, and typically safer, quicker, and cheaper to use compared with other offloading treatments. The effectiveness of offloading treatments also seems to increase when increased offloading mechanical features are incorporated within treatments, including customized insoles, rocker-bottom soles, controlled ankle motion, and higher cast walls. However, in clinical practice these gold standard knee-high offloading devices have low rates of prescription by clinicians and low rates of acceptance or adherence by patients. The common barriers resulting in this low use seem to surround historical misperceptions that are mostly dispelled by contemporary evidence. Further, research is now urgently required to close the implementation gap between the high-quality of supporting evidence and the low use of knee-high devices in clinical practice to reduce the high global disease burden of DFU in future.

Physical activity is an essential part of general health and diabetes management. However, recommending weight-bearing physical activity for people with plantar diabetic foot ulcers is controversial, even when gold standard offloading devices are used, as it is commonly thought to delay healing. We aimed to narratively review relevant studies investigating the relationship between plantar diabetic foot ulcer healing and weight-bearing activity, plantar pressure and device adherence. We defined relevant studies as those from two systematic reviews, along with those identified since using a similar updated Pubmed search strategy. We identified six studies. One study found that more daily steps were associated with worse ulcer healing, three found no significant association between steps and ulcer healing, and in two others the association was unclear. Thus, there is weak evidence for an inverse relationship between weight-bearing physical activity and plantar ulcer healing while utilizing offloading devices. We propose a Diabetic foot Offloading and Activity framework to guide future research to find the optimal balance between the positive and negative effects of weight-bearing activity in the context of foot ulcers. We hope such future studies will shed more conclusive light on the impact of weight-bearing activity on healing of plantar diabetic foot ulcers., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: GJ is a consultant for Novo Nordisk and PAL has been a speaker consultant for Sanofi, Australia, but do not consider these relevant conflicts for this paper. JJvN, RTC, BN and MJM have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Self-care in diabetes related foot disease (DFD) is challenging and contributes to poor outcomes. Motivational Interviewing (MI) can engage people in self-care and modifying it by integrating imagery may further improve its outcomes. No previous studies have trained podiatrists in using MI to address DFD self-care. This was the first study on training podiatrists to conduct imagery-based motivational interviewing (MI) when treating people with DFD, and to examine impacts on MI related skills, job satisfaction and subjective experiences in a mixed-methods pilot study., Methods: Eleven recruited podiatrists (median age: 35 years, 9 female and 2 male) received two 4-h training sessions, and three received subsequent mentoring. MI and imagery skills were rated using validated tools during two clinical sessions per participant at baseline, and 2- and 12-weeks post-training. Job satisfaction was assessed at baseline and 12 weeks. Semi-structured interviews at 12 weeks were analysed using the framework approach., Results: Significant improvements over time (p = .006-.044) with substantial effect sizes (η 2  = .50-.67) were found in three of four global MI related communication skills and two of four MI behaviours. However, effects on these indices were not sustained to 12 weeks, and imagery was rarely used. Job satisfaction was high at baseline and unchanged at follow-up (p = 0.34, η 2  = .100). In qualitative interviews, MI training and skills were valued, but significant challenges in using MI when treating people with DFD were reported., Conclusion: Training podiatrists in MI may have potential but more training, observation and mentoring appear needed to obtain sustained communication changes in practice.

Background: Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) is a leading cause of global hospitalisation, amputation and disability burdens; yet, the epidemiology of the DFD burden is unclear in Australia. We aimed to systematically review the literature reporting the prevalence and incidence of risk factors for DFD (e.g. neuropathy, peripheral artery disease), of DFD (ulcers and infection), and of diabetes-related amputation (total, minor and major amputation) in Australian populations., Methods: We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE databases for peer-reviewed articles published until December 31, 2019. We used search strings combining key terms for prevalence or incidence, DFD or amputation, and Australia. Search results were independently screened for eligibility by two investigators. Publications that reported prevalence or incidence of outcomes of interest in geographically defined Australian populations were eligible for inclusion. Included studies were independently assessed for methodological quality and key data were extracted by two investigators., Results: Twenty publications met eligibility and were included. There was high heterogeneity for populations investigated and methods used to identify outcomes. We found within diabetes populations, the prevalence of risk factors ranged from 10.0-58.8%, of DFD from 1.2-1.5%, and the incidence of diabetes-related amputation ranged from 5.2-7.2 per 1000 person-years. Additionally, the incidence of DFD-related hospitalisation ranged from 5.2-36.6 per 1000 person-years within diabetes populations. Furthermore, within inpatients with diabetes, we found the prevalence of risk factors ranged from 35.3-43.3%, DFD from 7.0-15.1% and amputation during hospitalisation from 1.4-5.8%., Conclusions: Our review suggests a similar risk factor prevalence, low but uncertain DFD prevalence, and high DFD-related hospitalisation and amputation incidence in Australia compared to international populations. These findings may suggest that a low proportion of people with risk factors develop DFD, however, it is also possible that there is an underestimation of DFD prevalence in Australia in the few limited studies, given the high incidence of hospitalisation and amputation because of DFD. Either way, studies of nationally representative populations using valid outcome measures are needed to verify these DFD-related findings and interpretations.

Objective: No study has reported global disability burden estimates for individual diabetes-related lower-extremity complications (DRLECs). The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study presents a robust opportunity to address this gap., Research Design and Methods: GBD 2016 data, including prevalence and years lived with disability (YLDs), for the DRLECs of diabetic neuropathy, foot ulcer, and amputation with and without prosthesis were used. The GBD estimated prevalence using data from systematic reviews and DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool. YLDs were estimated as the product of prevalence estimates and disability weights for each DRLEC. We reported global and sex-, age-, region-, and country-specific estimates for each DRLEC for 1990 and 2016., Results: In 2016, an estimated 131 million people (1.8% of the global population) had DRLECs. An estimated 16.8 million YLDs (2.1% global YLDs) were caused by DRLECs, including 12.9 million (95% uncertainty interval 8.30-18.8) from neuropathy only, 2.5 million (1.7-3.6) from foot ulcers, 1.1 million (0.7-1.4) from amputation without prosthesis, and 0.4 million (0.3-0.5) from amputation with prosthesis. Age-standardized YLD rates of all DRLECs increased by between 14.6% and 31.0% from 1990 estimates. Male-to-female YLD ratios ranged from 0.96 for neuropathy only to 1.93 for foot ulcers. The 50- to 69-year-old age-group accounted for 47.8% of all YLDs from DRLECs., Conclusions: These first-ever global estimates suggest that DRLECs are a large and growing contributor to the disability burden worldwide and disproportionately affect males and middle- to older-aged populations. These findings should facilitate policy makers worldwide to target strategies at populations disproportionately affected by DRLECs., (© 2020 by the American Diabetes Association.)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. This guideline is on the use of offloading interventions to promote the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes and updates the previous IWGDF guideline. We followed the GRADE methodology to devise clinical questions and critically important outcomes in the PICO format, to conduct a systematic review of the medical-scientific literature, and to write recommendations and their rationale. The recommendations are based on the quality of evidence found in the systematic review, expert opinion where evidence was not available, and a weighing of the benefits and harms, patient preferences, feasibility and applicability, and costs related to the intervention. For healing a neuropathic plantar forefoot or midfoot ulcer in a person with diabetes, we recommend that a nonremovable knee-high offloading device is the first choice of offloading treatment. A removable knee-high and removable ankle-high offloading device are to be considered as the second- and third-choice offloading treatment, respectively, if contraindications or patient intolerance to nonremovable offloading exist. Appropriately, fitting footwear combined with felted foam can be considered as the fourth-choice offloading treatment. If non-surgical offloading fails, we recommend to consider surgical offloading interventions for healing metatarsal head and digital ulcers. We have added new recommendations for the use of offloading treatment for healing ulcers that are complicated with infection or ischaemia and for healing plantar heel ulcers. Offloading is arguably the most important of multiple interventions needed to heal a neuropathic plantar foot ulcer in a person with diabetes. Following these recommendations will help health care professionals and teams provide better care for diabetic patients who have a foot ulcer and are at risk for infection, hospitalization, and amputation., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Multiple disciplines are involved in the management of diabetic foot disease, and a common vocabulary is essential for clear communication. Based on the systematic reviews of the literature that form the basis of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) Guidelines, the IWGDF has developed a set of definitions and criteria for diabetic foot disease. This document describes these definitions and criteria. We suggest these definitions be used consistently in both clinical practice and research to facilitate clear communication between professionals., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Offloading interventions are commonly used in clinical practice to heal foot ulcers. The aim of this updated systematic review is to investigate the effectiveness of offloading interventions to heal diabetic foot ulcers., Methods: We updated our previous systematic review search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to also include original studies published between July 29, 2014 and August 13, 2018 relating to four offloading intervention categories in populations with diabetic foot ulcers: (a) offloading devices, (b) footwear, (c) other offloading techniques, and (d) surgical offloading techniques. Outcomes included ulcer healing, plantar pressure, ambulatory activity, adherence, adverse events, patient-reported measures, and cost-effectiveness. Included controlled studies were assessed for methodological quality and had key data extracted into evidence and risk of bias tables. Included non-controlled studies were summarised on a narrative basis., Results: We identified 41 studies from our updated search for a total of 165 included studies. Six included studies were meta-analyses, 26 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 13 other controlled studies, and 120 non-controlled studies. Five meta-analyses and 12 RCTs provided high-quality evidence for non-removable knee-high offloading devices being more effective than removable offloading devices and therapeutic footwear for healing plantar forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Total contact casts (TCCs) and non-removable knee-high walkers were shown to be equally effective. Moderate-quality evidence exists for removable knee-high and ankle-high offloading devices being equally effective in healing, but knee-high devices have a larger effect on reducing plantar pressure and ambulatory activity. Low-quality evidence exists for the use of felted foam and surgical offloading to promote healing of plantar forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Very limited evidence exists for the efficacy of any offloading intervention for healing plantar heel ulcers, non-plantar ulcers, and neuropathic ulcers with infection or ischemia., Conclusion: Strong evidence supports the use of non-removable knee-high offloading devices (either TCC or non-removable walker) as the first-choice offloading intervention for healing plantar neuropathic forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Removable offloading devices, either knee-high or ankle-high, are preferred as second choice over other offloading interventions. The evidence bases to support any other offloading intervention is still weak and more high-quality controlled studies are needed in these areas., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)