Background There are no current Australian guidelines on the prevention of diabetes-related foot ulceration (DFU). A national expert panel aimed to systematically identify and adapt suitable international guidelines to the Australian context to create new Australian evidence-based guidelines on prevention of first-ever and/or recurrent DFU. These guidelines will include for the first-time considerations for rural and remote, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Methods The National Health and Medical Research Council procedures were followed to adapt suitable international guidelines on DFU prevention to the Australian health context. This included a search of public databases after which the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) prevention guideline was deemed the most appropriate for adaptation. The 16 IWGDF prevention recommendations were assessed using the ADAPTE and GRADE systems to decide if they should be adopted, adapted or excluded for the new Australian guideline. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendation ratings were re-evaluated with reference to the Australian context. This guideline underwent public consultation, further revision, and approval by national peak bodies. Results Of the 16 original IWGDF prevention recommendations, nine were adopted, six were adapted and one was excluded. It is recommended that all people at increased risk of DFU are assessed at intervals corresponding to the IWGDF risk ratings. For those at increased risk, structured education about appropriate foot protection, inspection, footwear, weight-bearing activities, and foot self-care is recommended. Prescription of orthotic interventions and/or medical grade footwear, providing integrated foot care, and self-monitoring of foot skin temperatures (contingent on validated, user-friendly and affordable systems becoming available in Australia) may also assist in preventing DFU. If the above recommended non-surgical treatment fails, the use of various surgical interventions for the prevention of DFU can be considered. Conclusions This new Australian evidence-based guideline on prevention of DFU, endorsed by 10 national peak bodies, provides specific recommendations for relevant health professionals and consumers in the Australian context to prevent DFU. Following these recommendations should achieve better DFU prevention outcomes in Australia.

Aim To investigate the utility of calcaneal quantitative ultrasound compared with bone densitometry (DXA) in predicting incident low-trauma fracture in type 2 diabetes. Methods This retrospective cohort study included a subset of participants in the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study who had concurrent calcaneal quantitative ultrasound and DXA measurement, comprising 809 people without type 2 diabetes and 96 with type 2 diabetes. Fracture data had been collected prospectively. Cox proportional hazard models and receiver operating curves (ROC) were used to compare calcaneal quantitative ultrasound and DXA parameters as predictors for any low-trauma fracture. Results The median age of participants was 71 years (IQR 68-76, 50% men) for those without type 2 diabetes and 70 years (IQR 68-76, 55% men) for those with type 2 diabetes. There was no difference in low-trauma fracture incidence between groups when stratified by sex. In those without type 2 diabetes, the hazard ratio for fracture per 1 SD decrease in broadband ultrasound attenuation and femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) was 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-1.71] and 1.39 (95% CI 1.17-1.64), respectively. The corresponding figures in type 2 diabetes were 1.81 (95% CI 1.03-3.19) for broadband ultrasound attenuation and 2.55 (95% CI 1.28-5.08) for femoral neck BMD. Conclusion Broadband ultrasound attenuation is comparable with femoral neck BMD as a predictor for low trauma incident fracture in type 2 diabetes. Calcaneal quantitative ultrasound offers several advantages over DXA and should be considered in further studies of bone health screening or in clinical practice where DXA is unavailable.

Aims To evaluate the impact of peripheral neuropathy on bone health in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods Participants with T2DM were grouped according to the presence of peripheral neuropathy as assessed by vibration perception threshold (VPT). Recruitment ensured groups were balanced for age, sex and body mass index (BMI). Bone health was measured by calcaneal quantitative ultrasound (QUS) and compared between groups. Calcaneal QUS parameters were correlated across the cohort with VPT and other prespecified variables. Results Thirty-four participants (17 per group) were included with mean age 68 ± 12 years, 47% male, with median BMI 29.9 (IQR 26.9–32.7) kg/m 2 . The peripheral neuropathy group had significantly lower mean Stiffness Index (87 ± 12 versus 101 ± 16, p = 0.01), Speed of Sound (1542 ± 28 versus 1574 ± 34 m/s, p < 0.01), and a trend towards lower Broadband Ultrasound Attenuation (113 ± 10 versus 120 ± 12 dB/MHz, p = 0.07). Pedal bone health asymmetry was not a significant feature in those with peripheral neuropathy. All calcaneal QUS parameters correlated negatively with VPT, although significance of the relationship with Broadband Ultrasound Attenuation was nullified if controlled for diabetes duration or time on insulin. Broadband Ultrasound Attenuation showed independent negative correlation with diabetes duration. Conclusions People with T2DM and peripheral neuropathy have poorer bone health as measured by calcaneal QUS than those without peripheral neuropathy, independent of age, sex and BMI.

Background: In an era of increasing technology and telehealth utilization, three-dimensional (3D) wound cameras promise reliable, rapid, and touch-free ulceration measurements. However, reliability data for commercially available devices in the diabetes foot service setting is lacking. We aimed to evaluate the reliability of diabetes-related foot ulceration measurement using a 3D wound camera in comparison to the routinely used ruler and probe. Method: Participants were prospectively recruited from a tertiary interdisciplinary diabetes foot service. Ulcerations were measured at each visit by two blinded observers, first by ruler and probe, and then using a 3D wound camera twice. Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Measurement methods were compared by Pearson correlation. Results: Sixty-three ulcerations affecting 38 participants were measured over 122 visits. Interobserver reliability of ruler measurement was excellent for estimated area (ICC 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.98) and depth (ICC 0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.95). Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the 3D wound camera area was excellent (ICC 0.96, 95%CI 0.95-0.97 and 0.97 95% CI 0.96-0.98, respectively). Depth was unrecordable in over half of 3D wound camera measurements, and reliability was inferior to probe measurement. Area correlation between methods was good ( R = 0.88 and 0.94 per observer); however, depth correlation was poor ( R = 0.49 and 0.65). Conclusions: 3D wound cameras offer practical advantages over ruler-based measurement. In diabetes-related foot ulceration, the reliability and comparability of area measurement was excellent across both methods, although depth was more reliably obtained by the probe. These limitations, together with cost, are important considerations if implementing this technology in diabetes foot care.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract