Efficacy and safety of autologous platelet-rich plasma for diabetic foot ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of autologous platelet-rich plasma (au-PRP) for diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) treatment. METHOD: We conducted database searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, evidence-based medicine reviews: CENTRAL, PubMed, and Web of Science) and reference mining for randomised controlled trials from inception to 23 January 2022. Results were scrutinised, data were extracted and research quality was investigated by two independent authors. Primary outcome was the proportion of complete ulcer healing. Secondary outcomes included both the mean time to complete healing and the incidence of adverse events. Statistical analyses were performed in RevMan 5.4 (Cochrane, UK). Kaplan-Meier curves for time to complete healing were pooled in R software (version 4.1.2) (R Foundation, Austria). RESULTS: Of the 231 records identified, 17 studies with a total of 1303 participants (649 randomised to the au-PRP group and 654 to a standard of care (SOC) group) met the eligibility criteria and were included in our study. Compared with SOC, au-PRP appeared to promote the complete healing rate (odds ratio (OR): 2.11; 95% Confidence Interval: 1.55-2.86). Au-PRP also appeared to significantly shorten complete healing time (mean duration: -19.04 days; 95%CI: -20.46--17.61]). There was no significant difference on adverse events. Results were robust on sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of this review and meta-analysis, Au-PRP is an effective and safe adjuvant therapy for DFUs.

Efficacy and safety of recombinant human epidermal growth factor for diabetic foot ulcers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of recombinant human epidermal growth factor (rhEGF) in treating diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), we conducted both database searches (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science) and reference searches for randomised controlled trials from the inception of databases to 30 January 2020. Two reviewers independently scrutinised the trials, extracted data, and assessed the quality of trials. The primary outcome was the proportion of complete healing. The secondary outcomes were mean time to complete healing and adverse events. A subgroup analysis was performed by different administration routes. Statistical analyses were performed in RevMan 5.3. The time to complete healing Kaplan-Meier curves was pooled in the R software. Of the 156 citations, 9 trials (720 participants) met eligibility criteria and were included. The rhEGF achieved a higher complete healing rate than placebo (OR: 2.79, [95% CI: 1.99, 3.99]). The rhEGF also significantly shorten complete healing time (MD: -14.10 days, [95% CI: -18.03, -10.16]). Subgroup analysis showed that topical application was superior to intralesional injection, but that may be because of different ulcer severity they included. No significant difference was shown in adverse events. Results were coherent with sensitivity analyses. Therefore, rhEGF is an effective and safe treatment for DFUs.

Human amniotic membrane allograft, a novel treatment for chronic diabetic foot ulcers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of human amniotic membrane (HAM) allograft in treating chronic diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), a comprehensive search of randomised controlled trials in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CENTRAL and Web of Science was conducted to December 7, 2019. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of studies. The primary outcome was the proportion of complete healing. The secondary outcomes were mean time to complete healing and adverse events. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3. We identified 257 articles, of which 7 articles (465 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. The proportion of complete wound healing in HAM plus standard of care (SOC) group was 3.88 times as high as that in SOC alone (RR: 3.88 [95% CI: 2.34, 6.44]) at 6 weeks, and 2.01 times at 12 weeks (RR: 2.01 [95%CI: 1.45, 2.77]). The intervention group had a significantly shorter time to complete healing (MD: -30.33 days, [95% CI: -37.95, -22.72]). The number needed to treat within 6 weeks was 2.3 ([95% CI: 1.8, 3.1]). No significant difference was shown in adverse events. Results were consistent in a sensitivity analysis. Hence, HAM plus SOC is effective and safe in treating chronic DFUs.

Effectiveness of the "Hand as Foot" teaching method in human physiology: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The "Hand as Foot" teaching method, an innovative approach in medical education, utilizes hand gestures to simulate anatomical structures and functions. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the "Hand as Foot" teaching method compared to traditional method in the "Human Physiology" course. METHODS: During the 2023 spring semester, a randomized controlled trial involved 84 health management students. Participants were randomly assigned to the "Hand as Foot" teaching group or the traditional teaching group. A self-designed Likert scale was used to evaluate students' perceptions of teaching effectiveness, covering dimensions such as engagingness, intuitiveness, facilitation of understanding, enhancement of memorization, and effortlessness of learning. Additionally, a knowledge assessment test was administered to measure knowledge acquisition. RESULTS: The "Hand as Foot teaching method" group (41 students) reported significantly higher ratings for all dimensions of teaching effectiveness compared to the traditional teaching group (43 students) (p ≤ 0.01). Despite the lack of statistical significance, the experimental group's test scores were notably superior (Mean = 6.35 vs. Mean = 5.94). DISCUSSION: The "Hand as Foot" teaching method demonstrated superior effectiveness in engaging students, facilitating comprehension, and enhancing memorization. Its interactive and tangible nature provided a holistic learning experience, enabling students to visualize complex physiological mechanisms. Additionally, it fostered active student participation and a desire for deeper understanding. CONCLUSION: While the "Hand as Foot" teaching method demonstrated strengths in engaging students and aiding comprehension, further researches with larger and diverse cohorts are needed to gauge its impact on learning outcomes and broader applicability.