Quality of life in patients with diabetic foot ulcers

Abstract

Aim: To ascertain quality of life in patients with ulcer affected diabetic foot (UADF), and to establish whether there was a relationship between respondentsʼ gender, age, duration and type of treatment for DM, duration of treatment for and etiology of wound, intensity of pain, degree of UADF, method of off-loading pressure on the foot, and quality of life. Design: A crosssectional study. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 167 patients with UADF. The data were acquired using the SF-36 and Wound-QoL questionnaires. Exploratory Regression analysis was used during the study as a descriptive technique. The model was realized using the ENTER method. Results: Of the patients who participated in this study, 68% were men and 32% women, their average age was 65 years, and the length of DM treatment was 19 years, with variations in DM treatment, UADF intensity, etiology, and size and degree of UADF, according to Wagner classification. Based on the values of beta coefficients, we can state that according to the SF-36, the main negative predictors of quality of life are: 1) DM treatment; 2) pain intensity; 3) age; 4) wound etiology; and 5) use of wheelchair. Whereas, according to the Wound-QoL, the main negative predictors of quality of life are: 1) DM treatment; 2) pain intensity; 3) size of the wound; 4) age; and 5) use of crutches. Conclusion: Although the results of the two models are similar in certain respects, there are also differences, explained by the fact that two different conceptions of measuring quality of life, with different scoring systems, were involved. Use of the Wound-QoL questionnaire proved particularly effective.

A Patient's Non-Adherence to the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: Longitudinal Case Study

“…Foot ulcers are a diabetic complication connected to a significant risk of morbidity, mortality, and amputation (Fisher et al, 2012). The golden standard of complex DFU treatment includes metabolism modification, relieving pressure on ulceration (wheelchair, forearm crutches, special contact fixation and splints, therapeutic footwear, braces, special insoles, bed rest), ischemia treatment (revascularization procedures), managing infection (ATB, local treatment), systematic local therapy (wound debridement), and therapeutic education (Brem et al, 2006;Hainer a Kunešová, in Kunešová et al, 2016;Jarl, 2018;Jarl and Lunqvist, 2016;Jirkovská et al 2016;Kudlová a Kočvarová, 2020). Complex DFU therapy requires a multidisciplinary team made up of mainly physicians with various specializations, nurses, a dietician, an educator, and an actively collaborating patient (Jarl and Lunqvist, 2016;Jirkovská et al 2016).…”

“…Complex DFU therapy requires a multidisciplinary team made up of mainly physicians with various specializations, nurses, a dietician, an educator, and an actively collaborating patient (Jarl and Lunqvist, 2016;Jirkovská et al 2016). However, it has turned out that physically limiting regimens may lead to increased psychological pressure (Kudlová a Kočvarová, 2020). Among the causes of patient nonadherence is the characteristics of DM (mild course from the start, insignificant symptoms for taking timely measures), treatment-related problems (dietary and movement limitation, regimen requirements), and insufficient support provided by loved ones.…”