Despite differences in health-care structures across Europe, delays in referral to specialist foot care teams seems to be a common theme. There is an ongoing need to educate GPs, nurses and patients to be more aware of the risk of DFU, and the need for prompt referral to specialist diabetic foot teams.

Aim To investigate the effectiveness of fast-track pathway (FTP) in the management of diabetic foot ulceration (DFU) after 2 years of implementation. Methods The study group was composed of patients who referred to a specialized DF centre due to DFUs. Those were divided in two groups: early referral (ER) and late referral (LR) patients. According to FTP, ER were considered patients who referred after 2 weeks in the case of uncomplicated non-healing ulcers (superficial, not infected, not ischemic), within 4 days in the case of complicated ulcers (ischemic, deep, mild infection) and within 24 h in the case of severely complicated ulcers (abscess, wet gangrene, fever). Healing, healing time, minor and major amputation, hospitalization, and survival were evaluated. The follow-up was 6 months. Results Two hundred patients were recruited. The mean age was 70 ± 13 years, 62.5% were male, 91% were affected by type 2 diabetes with a mean duration of 18 ± 11 years. Within the group, 79.5% had ER while 20.5% had LR. ER patients showed increased rates of healing (89.9 vs. 41.5%, p = 0.001), reduced healing time (10 vs. 16 weeks, p = 0.0002), lower rates of minor (17.6 vs. 75.6%, p < 0.0001) and major amputation (0.6 vs. 36.6%, p < 0.0001), hospitalization (47.1 vs. 82.9%, p = 0.001), and mortality (4.4 vs. 19.5%, p = 0.02) in comparison to LR. At multivariate analysis, ER was an independent predictor of healing, while LR was an independent predictor for minor and major amputation and hospitalization. Conclusion After the FTP implementation, less cases of LR were reported in comparison to ER. ER was an independent predictor of positive outcomes such as healing, healing time, limb salvage, hospitalization, and survival.

The intra-country and inter-country management of the complex aspects of DFU is quite heterogeneous. The cause of this finding is multifactorial. Although there are international guidelines, it would be beneficial to establish clear and specific competencies for the different health professionals involved in DFU management. As a minimum, intra-country heterogeneity should improve with their development.

No abstract

Objective: This study aimed to analyse the characteristics of patients, including demographics, medical history and treatment, with a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) during their first follow-up visit to a general practitioner (GP). Methods: A two-part quantitative online questionnaire was distributed among GPs in France, UK, Germany and Spain. Part one entailed a survey of GPs' perceptions of referrals for DFU. Part two collected data on recently managed DFU cases. The percentage of responses was compared for each question and across the four countries for significant differences. Results: In part one of the study, 600 questionnaires were collected (150 per country) and 1188 patients managed for a DFU were included in the second part. About 88% of patients had type 2 diabetes, with a significant proportion of suboptimal control (average HbA1c: 10.64mmol/l). A patient complaint led to diagnosis in 60% of the cases. Wounds were found to be more frequently located in the toes and midfoot, and were superficial (according to the Texas Wound Classification system) in 80% of the cases. More than two-thirds of patients developed small wounds (<5cm2); more than half of them had infected wounds. Approximately 50% of wounds were ischaemic, which triggered the onset of a DFU. Follow-up wound examinations before and after hospitalisation were performed by nurses, except in Germany where GPs undertook this role, including prescribing offloading devices and in the UK where follow-up was managed by podiatrists. Ischaemia, wound necrosis, suspected osteomyelitis and absence of wound healing were the primary reasons for hospital admission during the first month after diagnosis. Conclusion: Delay in specialised foot care is a recurring topic in the treatment of DFUs, even with different health-care structures across Europe. Knowledge and education on DFUs should be reinforced among GPs and nurses to establish a global DFU care network between primary and specialised care, avoid hospitalisation and adequately manage high-risk patients.