Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Telemedical and Standard Outpatient Monitoring of Diabetic Foot Ulcers.
Rasmussen, Benjamin S B; Froekjaer, Johnny; Bjerregaard, Mads R; Lauritsen, Jens; Hangaard, Joergen; Henriksen, Claus W; Halekoh, Ulrich; Yderstraede, Knud B.
Affiliation
  • Rasmussen BS; Department of Medical Endocrinology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
  • Froekjaer J; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
  • Bjerregaard MR; Department of Medical Endocrinology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
  • Lauritsen J; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
  • Hangaard J; Department of Internal Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
  • Henriksen CW; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kolding Hospital, Kolding, Denmark.
  • Halekoh U; Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Biodemography, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
  • Yderstraede KB; Department of Medical Endocrinology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark knud.yderstraede@rsyd.dk.
Diabetes Care ; 38(9): 1723-9, 2015 Sep.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26116717
OBJECTIVE: The role of telemedical monitoring in diabetic foot ulcer care is still uncertain. Our aim was to compare telemedical and standard outpatient monitoring in the care of patients with diabetic foot ulcers in a randomized controlled trial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Of the 736 screened individuals with diabetic foot ulcers, 401 met the eligibility criteria and were randomized between October 2010 and November 2014. The per-protocol telemedical monitoring consisted of two consultations in the patient's own home and one consultation at the outpatient clinic. Standard practice consisted of three outpatient clinic visits. The three-visit cycle was repeated until study end point. The study end points were defined as complete ulcer healing, amputation, or death. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-three individuals were randomized to telemedical monitoring and 181 to standard care. Demographics were similar in both groups. A cause-specific Cox proportional hazards model showed no difference in individuals monitored through telemedicine regarding wound healing (hazard ratio 1.11 [95% CI 0.87, 1.42], P = 0.42) or amputation (0.87 [0.54, 1.42], P = 0.59). We found a higher mortality incidence in the telemedical monitoring group compared with the standard outpatient monitoring group (8.68 [6.93, 10.88], P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of no significant difference regarding amputation and healing between telemedical and standard outpatient monitoring seem promising; however, for telemedical monitoring, a higher mortality throws into question the role of telemedicine in monitoring diabetic foot ulcers. Further studies are needed to investigate effects of telemedicine on mortality and other clinical outcomes and to identify patient subgroups that may have a poorer outcome through telemedical monitoring.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Outpatients / Telemedicine / Diabetic Foot / Monitoring, Ambulatory / Remote Consultation Type of study: Clinical_trials / Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: Diabetes Care Year: 2015 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Dinamarca Country of publication: Estados Unidos

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Outpatients / Telemedicine / Diabetic Foot / Monitoring, Ambulatory / Remote Consultation Type of study: Clinical_trials / Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: Diabetes Care Year: 2015 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Dinamarca Country of publication: Estados Unidos