Validation and application of the 2019 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot risk stratification for diabetic foot in Chinese patients

被引:2
|
作者
Hu, Xiling [1 ]
Zhang, Yao [2 ,3 ]
Chen, Yanming [2 ,3 ]
Zhang, Yin-Ping [1 ]
机构
[1] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, Sch Nursing, Hlth Sci Ctr, Xian, Peoples R China
[2] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Affiliated Hosp 3, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
[3] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Affiliated Hosp 3, Guangdong Prov Key Lab Diabetol, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Application; Diabetic foot; Validation; CLASSIFICATION-SYSTEM; ULCERATION; ULCERS; BURDEN; CARE;
D O I
10.1111/jdi.14014
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aims/Introduction: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the validation and application of the 2019 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) risk stratification system among Chinese patients with diabetes.Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was carried out with 254 patients with diabetes, but without an active diabetic foot (DF) ulcer. Patients hospitalized from January to May 2017 were enrolled, and the follow-up period was from January to May 2020. Patients were stratified into four risk groups based on the 2019 IWGDF risk stratification system.Results: Of the 254 patients, four of 31 patients at risk 1 were diagnosed with DF within 3 years, whereas 12 of 26 patients at risk 2 and 16 of 20 patients at risk 3 developed DF. The area under the curve was 0.919 (P < 0.01, 95% confidence interval 0.893-0.945). Because DF risk 2 and greater (risk 2 + risk 3) was the optimal cut-off point, we simplified the risk stratification system by using two tiers, namely, low risk (risk 0 + 1) and high risk (risk 2 + 3). For the simplified risk stratification system, the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, percent agreement, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 87.5%, 91.8%, 10.607, 91.3%, 60.8% and 98.1%, respectively. The ?(2)-test showed that the odds ratio of the high-risk group (risk 2 + 3) was 29.33-fold that of the low-risk group (risk 0 + 1).Conclusions: The 2019 IWGDF risk stratification system showed high validity and primary screening value in Chinese patients with diabetes. Thus, a simplified, two-tiered IWGDF stratification might be more efficient and cost-effective for predicting DF ulcers.
引用
收藏
页码:893 / 901
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Effectiveness of the diabetic foot risk classification system of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot
    Peters, EJG
    Lavery, LA
    DIABETES CARE, 2001, 24 (08) : 1442 - 1447
  • [2] Reevaluating the way we classify the diabetic foot: Restructuring the diabetic foot risk classification system of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot
    Lavery, Lawrence A.
    Peters, Edgar J. G.
    Williams, Jayme R.
    Murdoch, Douglas P.
    Hudson, Amanda
    Lavery, David C.
    DIABETES CARE, 2008, 31 (01) : 154 - 156
  • [3] The management of the diabetic foot: new guidelines from the International Working Group on Diabetic Foot
    Riva-Rovedda, Federica
    ASSISTENZA INFERMIERISTICA E RICERCA, 2024, 43 (02) : 76 - 82
  • [4] Prevalence of diabetic foot at risk of ulcer development and its components stratification according to the international working group on the diabetic foot (IWGDF): A systematic review with metanalysis
    Maldonado-Valer, Tania
    Pareja-Mujica, Luis F.
    Corcuera-Ciudad, Rodrigo
    Terry-Escalante, Fernando Andres
    Chevarria-Arriaga, Mylenka Jennifer
    Vasquez-Hassinger, Tery
    Yovera-Aldana, Marlon
    PLOS ONE, 2023, 18 (11):
  • [5] Peripheral Neuropathy and foot ulceration risk according International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot criteria
    Ramirez C, Katiuska N.
    Chacin Gonzalez, Maricarmen
    Bermudez, Valmore
    REVISTA LATINOAMERICANA DE HIPERTENSION, 2019, 14 (05): : 609 - +
  • [6] Standards for the development and methodology of the 2019 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot guidelines
    Bus, S. A.
    Van Netten, J. J.
    Hinchliffe, R. J.
    Apelqvist, J.
    Lipsky, B. A.
    Schaper, N. C.
    DIABETES-METABOLISM RESEARCH AND REVIEWS, 2020, 36
  • [7] Practical guidelines on the management and prevention of the diabetic foot - Based upon the International Consensus on the Diabetic Foot (2007) prepared by the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot
    Apelqvist, J.
    Bakker, K.
    van Houtum, W. H.
    Schaper, N. C.
    DIABETES-METABOLISM RESEARCH AND REVIEWS, 2008, 24 : S181 - S187
  • [8] Risk assessment of patients with diabetes for foot ulcers according to risk classification consensus of international working group on diabetic foot (IWGDF)
    Shahbazian, Hajieh
    Yazdanpanah, Leila
    Latifi, Seyed Mahmuod
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2013, 29 (03) : 730 - 734
  • [9] Diabetic foot: Practice guidelines of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) 2020-2021
    Tsagkaris, C.
    Sevdalis, N.
    Syrigou, E.
    Vakka, A.
    Kamaratos, A.
    SCIENTIFIC CHRONICLES, 2021, 26 (01) : 165 - 180
  • [10] International Working Group's Diabetic Foot Risk Classification: validation in a large population based cohort
    Peters, EJG
    Lavery, LA
    Armstrong, DG
    DIABETOLOGIA, 2005, 48 : A97 - A97