Die PEDIS-Klassifikation als Prädiktor der Amputationshöhe bei Patienten mit diabetischem Fußsyndrom

Wiemeyer, Stefan; Heggeman, Jan; Hafer, Guido

doi:10.1016/j.fuspru.2012.05.004

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…have evaluated other classifications, a direct comparison was not conducted. Eight studies, 51–58 five at high risk of bias, provided results in the same line for amputation prediction.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Although two of them (from Abbas et al and Ndosi et al 49,50 ) have evaluated other classifications, a direct comparison was not conducted. Eight studies, [51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58] five at high risk of bias, provided results in the same line for amputation prediction.…”

Section: Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment Scale (Dfuas)mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Three studies [49][50][51] validated this classification for the prediction of healing (see Supplementary Table S19), reporting a statistically significant association between some composing variables but not all.…”

Section: Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment Scale (Dfuas)mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Classification of foot ulcers in people with diabetes: A systematic review

Monteiro‐Soares

Hamilton

Russell

et al. 2023

Diabetes Metabolism Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundClassification and scoring systems can help both clinical management and audit the outcomes of routine care.AimThis study aimed to assess published systems used to characterise ulcers in people with diabetes to determine which should be recommended to (a) aid communication between health professionals, (b) predict clinical outcome of individual ulcers, (c) characterise people with infection and/or peripheral arterial disease, and (d) audit to compare outcomes in different populations. This systematic review is part of the process of developing the 2023 guidelines to classify foot ulcers from the International Working Group on Diabetic Foot.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science for articles published up to December 2021 which evaluated the association, accuracy or reliability of systems used to classify ulcers in people with diabetes. Published classifications had to have been validated in populations of >80% of people with diabetes and a foot ulcer.ResultsWe found 28 systems addressed in 149 studies. Overall, the certainty of the evidence for each classification was low or very low, with 19 (68%) of the classifications being assessed by ≤ 3 studies. The most frequently validated system was the one from Meggitt‐Wagner, but the articles validating this system focused mainly on the association between the different grades and amputation. Clinical outcomes were not standardized but included ulcer‐free survival, ulcer healing, hospitalisation, limb amputation, mortality, and cost.ConclusionDespite the limitations, this systematic review provided sufficient evidence to support recommendations on the use of six particular systems in specific clinical scenarios.

show abstract

“…have evaluated other classifications, a direct comparison was not conducted. Eight studies, 51–58 five at high risk of bias, provided results in the same line for amputation prediction.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 90%