The silent overall burden of foot disease in a representative hospitalised population.

The aims of this study were to investigate the point prevalence, and associated independent factors, for foot disease (ulcers, infections and ischaemia) in a representative hospitalised population. We included 733 (83%) of 883 eligible adult inpatients across five representative Australian hospitals on one day. We collected an extensive range of self-reported characteristics from participants. We examined all participants to clinically diagnose foot disease (ulcers, infections and ischaemia) and amputation procedures. Overall, 72 participants (9·8%) [95% confidence interval (CI):7·2-11·3%] had foot disease. Foot ulcers, in 49 participants (6·7%), were independently associated with peripheral neuropathy, peripheral arterial disease, previous foot ulcers, trauma and past surgeon treatment (P < 0·05). Foot infections, in 24 (3·3%), were independently associated with previous foot ulcers, trauma and past surgeon treatment (P < 0·01). Ischaemia, in 33 (4·5%), was independently associated with older age, smokers and past surgeon treatment (P < 0·01). Amputation procedures, in 14 (1·9%), were independently associated with foot infections (P < 0·01). We found that one in every ten inpatients had foot disease, and less than half of those had diabetes. After adjusting for diabetes, factors linked with foot disease were similar to those identified in diabetes-related literature. The overall inpatient foot disease burden is similar in size to well-known medical conditions and should receive similar attention.

Australian Diabetes Foot Network: management of diabetes-related foot ulceration - a clinical update.

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.

Standardising practices improves clinical diabetic foot management: the Queensland Diabetic Foot Innovation Project, 2006-09.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to report the clinical practice changes resulting from strategies to standardise diabetic foot clinical management in three diverse ambulatory service sites in Queensland, Australia. METHODS: Multifaceted strategies were implemented in 2008, including: multidisciplinary teams, clinical pathways, clinical training, clinical indicators, and telehealth support. Prior to the intervention, none of the aforementioned strategies were used, except one site had a basic multidisciplinary team. A retrospective audit of consecutive patient records from July 2006 to June 2007 determined baseline clinical activity (n=101). A clinical pathway teleform was implemented as a clinical activity analyser in 2008 (n=327) and followed up in 2009 (n=406). Pre- and post-implementation data were analysed using Chi-square tests with a significance level set at P<0.05. RESULTS: There was an improvement in surveillance of the high risk population of 34% in 2008 and 19% in 2009, and treating according to risk of 15% in 2009 (P<0.05). The documentation of all best-practice clinical activities performed improved 13-66% (P<0.03). CONCLUSION: These findings support the use of multifaceted strategies to standardise practice and improve diabetic foot complications management in diverse ambulatory services.

Standardising practices through form design and education improves insulin management.

Diabetes is common in hospitalised patients and insulin is frequently required for management. Insulin is a high-risk drug, accounting for about 15% of reported medication-related incidents. Despite its complexity, insulin management in hospitals is often undertaken by junior and non-specialist staff. Improving insulin management requires addressing safe prescribing and administration as well as quality use of insulin. Common errors in insulin use are well documented and can be addressed through form design and enhancing decision support. We undertook to improve insulin management using a locally proven improvement methodology. New forms were developed for intravenous and subcutaneous insulin and blood glucose management. Audited pilot studies in four hospitals confirmed improved insulin management without adversely impacting on overall diabetes management as assessed using Glucometrics. Subsequently, the forms have been introduced to 70% of Queensland public hospitals with roll-out to remaining hospitals continuing. Large-scale standardisation of insulin management is feasible.

Foot Complications in a Representative Australian Inpatient Population.

We investigated the prevalence and factors independently associated with foot complications in a representative inpatient population (adults admitted for any reason with and without diabetes). We analysed data from the Foot disease in inpatients study, a sample of 733 representative inpatients. Previous amputation, previous foot ulceration, peripheral arterial disease (PAD), peripheral neuropathy (PN), and foot deformity were the foot complications assessed. Sociodemographic, medical, and foot treatment history were collected. Overall, 46.0% had a foot complication with 23.9% having multiple; those with diabetes had higher prevalence of foot complications than those without diabetes (p < 0.01). Previous amputation (4.1%) was independently associated with previous foot ulceration, foot deformity, cerebrovascular accident, and past surgeon treatment (p < 0.01). Previous foot ulceration (9.8%) was associated with PN, PAD, past podiatry, and past nurse treatment (p < 0.02). PAD (21.0%) was associated with older age, males, indigenous people, cancer, PN, and past surgeon treatment (p < 0.02). PN (22.0%) was associated with older age, diabetes, mobility impairment, and PAD (p < 0.05). Foot deformity (22.4%) was associated with older age, mobility impairment, past podiatry treatment, and PN (p < 0.01). Nearly half of all inpatients had a foot complication. Those with foot complications were older, male, indigenous, had diabetes, cerebrovascular accident, mobility impairment, and other foot complications or past foot treatment.

Direct inpatient burden caused by foot-related conditions: a multisite point-prevalence study.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this point-prevalence study were to investigate a representative inpatient population to determine the prevalence of people admitted to hospital for the reason of a foot-related condition, and identify associated independent factors. METHODS: Participants were adult inpatients in 5 different representative hospitals, admitted for any reason on the day of data collection. Maternity, mental health and cognitively impaired inpatients were excluded. Participants were surveyed on a range of self-reported demographic, social determinant, medical history, foot disease history, self-care, footwear, past foot treatment prior to hospitalisation and reason for admission variables. Physical examinations were performed to clinically diagnose a range of foot disease and foot risk factor variables. Independent factors associated with being admitted to hospital for the primary or secondary reason of a foot-related condition were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 733 participants were included; mean (SD) age 62 (19) years, male 55.8%. Foot-related conditions were the primary reason for admission in 54 participants (7.4% (95% CI 5.7% to 9.5%)); 36 for foot disease (4.9%), 15 foot trauma (2.1%). Being admitted for the primary reason of a foot-related condition was independently associated with foot infection, critical peripheral arterial disease, foot trauma and past foot treatment by a general practitioner and surgeon (p<0.01). Foot-related conditions were a secondary reason for admission in 28 participants (3.8% (2.6% to 5.6%)), and were independently associated with diabetes and current foot ulcer (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study, the first in a representative inpatient population, suggests the direct inpatient burden caused by foot-related conditions is significantly higher than previously appreciated. Findings indicate 1 in every 13 inpatients was primarily admitted because of a foot-related condition with most due to foot disease or foot trauma. Future strategies are recommended to investigate and intervene in the considerable inpatient burden caused by foot-related conditions.

Reduced Incidence of Foot-Related Hospitalisation and Amputation amongst Persons with Diabetes in Queensland, Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To determine trends in the incidence of foot-related hospitalisation and amputation amongst persons with diabetes in Queensland (Australia) between 2005 and 2010 that coincided with changes in state-wide ambulatory diabetic foot-related complication management. METHODS: All data from cases admitted for the principal reason of diabetes foot-related hospitalisation or amputation in Queensland from 2005-2010 were obtained from the Queensland Hospital Admitted Patient Data Collection dataset. Incidence rates for foot-related hospitalisation (admissions, bed days used) and amputation (total, minor, major) cases amongst persons with diabetes were calculated per 1,000 person-years with diabetes (diabetes population) and per 100,000 person-years (general population). Age-sex standardised incidence and age-sex adjusted Poisson regression models were also calculated for the general population. RESULTS: There were 4,443 amputations, 24,917 hospital admissions and 260,085 bed days used for diabetes foot-related complications in Queensland. Incidence per 1,000 person-years with diabetes decreased from 2005 to 2010: 43.0% for hospital admissions (36.6 to 20.9), 40.1% bed days (391 to 234), 40.0% total amputations (6.47 to 3.88), 45.0% major amputations (2.18 to 1.20), 37.5% minor amputations (4.29 to 2.68) (p < 0.01 respectively). Age-sex standardised incidence per 100,000 person-years in the general population also decreased from 2005 to 2010: 23.3% hospital admissions (105.1 to 80.6), 19.5% bed days (1,122 to 903), 19.3% total amputations (18.57 to 14.99), 26.4% major amputations (6.26 to 4.61), 15.7% minor amputations (12.32 to 10.38) (p < 0.01 respectively). The age-sex adjusted incidence rates per calendar year decreased in the general population (rate ratio (95% CI)); hospital admissions 0.949 (0.942-0.956), bed days 0.964 (0.962-0.966), total amputations 0.962 (0.946-0.979), major amputations 0.945 (0.917-0.974), minor amputations 0.970 (0.950-0.991) (p < 0.05 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There were significant reductions in the incidence of foot-related hospitalisation and amputation amongst persons with diabetes in the population of Queensland over a recent six-year period.

Prevalence of foot disease and risk factors in general inpatient populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review studies reporting the prevalence in general adult inpatient populations of foot disease disorders (foot wounds, foot infections, collective 'foot disease') and risk factors (peripheral arterial disease (PAD), peripheral neuropathy (PN), foot deformity). METHODS: A systematic review of studies published between 1980 and 2013 was undertaken using electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL). Keywords and synonyms relating to prevalence, inpatients, foot disease disorders and risk factors were used. Studies reporting foot disease or risk factor prevalence data in general inpatient populations were included. Included study's reference lists and citations were searched and experts consulted to identify additional relevant studies. 2 authors, blinded to each other, assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Applicable data were extracted by 1 author and checked by a second author. Prevalence proportions and SEs were calculated for all included studies. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects models where 3 eligible studies were available. RESULTS: Of the 4972 studies initially identified, 78 studies reporting 84 different cohorts (total 60 231 517 participants) were included. Foot disease prevalence included: foot wounds 0.01-13.5% (70 cohorts), foot infections 0.05-6.4% (7 cohorts), collective foot disease 0.2-11.9% (12 cohorts). Risk factor prevalence included: PAD 0.01-36.0% (10 cohorts), PN 0.003-2.8% (6 cohorts), foot deformity was not reported. Pooled prevalence estimates were only able to be calculated for pressure ulcer-related foot wounds 4.6% (95% CI 3.7% to 5.4%)), diabetes-related foot wounds 2.4% (1.5% to 3.4%), diabetes-related foot infections 3.4% (0.2% to 6.5%), diabetes-related foot disease 4.7% (0.3% to 9.2%). Heterogeneity was high in all pooled estimates (I(2)=94.2-97.8%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This review found high heterogeneity, yet suggests foot disease was present in 1 in every 20 inpatients and a major risk factor in 1 in 3 inpatients. These findings are likely an underestimate and more robust studies are required to provide more precise estimates.

The Queensland high risk foot form (QHRFF) - is it a reliable and valid clinical research tool for foot disease?

BACKGROUND: Foot disease complications, such as foot ulcers and infection, contribute to considerable morbidity and mortality. These complications are typically precipitated by "high-risk factors", such as peripheral neuropathy and peripheral arterial disease. High-risk factors are more prevalent in specific "at risk" populations such as diabetes, kidney disease and cardiovascular disease. To the best of the authors' knowledge a tool capturing multiple high-risk factors and foot disease complications in multiple at risk populations has yet to be tested. This study aimed to develop and test the validity and reliability of a Queensland High Risk Foot Form (QHRFF) tool. METHODS: The study was conducted in two phases. Phase one developed a QHRFF using an existing diabetes foot disease tool, literature searches, stakeholder groups and expert panel. Phase two tested the QHRFF for validity and reliability. Four clinicians, representing different levels of expertise, were recruited to test validity and reliability. Three cohorts of patients were recruited; one tested criterion measure reliability (n = 32), another tested criterion validity and inter-rater reliability (n = 43), and another tested intra-rater reliability (n = 19). Validity was determined using sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values (PPV). Reliability was determined using Kappa, weighted Kappa and intra-class correlation (ICC) statistics. RESULTS: A QHRFF tool containing 46 items across seven domains was developed. Criterion measure reliability of at least moderate categories of agreement (Kappa > 0.4; ICC > 0.75) was seen in 91% (29 of 32) tested items. Criterion validity of at least moderate categories (PPV > 0.7) was seen in 83% (60 of 72) tested items. Inter- and intra-rater reliability of at least moderate categories (Kappa > 0.4; ICC > 0.75) was seen in 88% (84 of 96) and 87% (20 of 23) tested items respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The QHRFF had acceptable validity and reliability across the majority of items; particularly items identifying relevant co-morbidities, high-risk factors and foot disease complications. Recommendations have been made to improve or remove identified weaker items for future QHRFF versions. Overall, the QHRFF possesses suitable practicality, validity and reliability to assess and capture relevant foot disease items across multiple at risk populations.

Australian Diabetes Foot Network: practical guideline on the provision of footwear for people with diabetes.

Trauma, in the form of pressure and/or friction from footwear, is a common cause of foot ulceration in people with diabetes. These practical recommendations regarding the provision of footwear for people with diabetes were agreed upon following review of existing position statements and clinical guidelines. The aim of this process was not to re-invent existing guidelines but to provide practical guidance for health professionals on how they can best deliver these recommendations within the Australian health system. Where information was lacking or inconsistent, a consensus was reached following discussion by all authors. Appropriately prescribed footwear, used alone or in conjunction with custom-made foot orthoses, can reduce pedal pressures and reduce the risk of foot ulceration. It is important for all health professionals involved in the care of people with diabetes to both assess and make recommendations on the footwear needs of their clients or to refer to health professionals with such skills and knowledge. Individuals with more complex footwear needs (for example those who require custom-made medical grade footwear and orthoses) should be referred to health professionals with experience in the prescription of these modalities and who are able to provide appropriate and timely follow-up. Where financial disadvantage is a barrier to individuals acquiring appropriate footwear, health care professionals should be aware of state and territory based equipment funding schemes that can provide financial assistance. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and people living in rural and remote areas are likely to have limited access to a broad range of footwear. Provision of appropriate footwear to people with diabetes in these communities needs be addressed as part of a comprehensive national strategy to reduce the burden of diabetes and its complications on the health system.

Using the quality improvement cycle on clinical indicators--improve or remove?

The variable life-adjusted display is a graphical, statistical methodology used in Queensland to monitor patient outcomes of clinical indicators. The quality improvement cycle is a systematic approach employed by patient safety and quality programs worldwide to improve patient care. The quality improvement cycle is beneficial to the review and refinement of indicator definitions. Indicators with definitional issues that are not subject to the quality improvement cycle may initially prompt quality improvement opportunities, but are more likely to potentially lead to unnecessary chart and clinical reviews, which will disengage coders and clinicians. Queensland recently used the quality improvement cycle to refine the laparoscopic cholecystectomy complications of surgery indicator definition and several maternity definitions.

Prediabetes: a position statement from the Australian Diabetes Society and Australian Diabetes Educators Association.

Prediabetes, the presence of impaired fasting glucose/glycaemia and/or impaired glucose tolerance, affects about 16.4% of Australian adults. People with prediabetes are at increased risk of developing diabetes, and cardiovascular and other macrovascular disease. Management includes reducing cardiovascular disease risk factors, specifically lipid and blood pressure abnormalities, and smoking-cessation counselling. To help prevent progression to diabetes, people with prediabetes who are overweight or obese require intensive lifestyle intervention. Medication to help prevent diabetes may also be used, but only after a minimum of 6 months of lifestyle intervention. In people with prediabetes, there is no role for routinely testing: capillary blood glucose; glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) levels; serum insulin or pancreatic C-peptide levels; or testing for ischaemic heart disease or the microvascular complications of diabetes. Follow-up assessment of glycaemia in prediabetes requires a formal 75 g oral glucose tolerance test, initially performed annually, with subsequent individualised testing frequency.