AIMS: Foot ulcers are a common and important complication of diabetes. Variation in the clinical presentation of this disease has resulted in a paucity of evidence from comparable studies to guide optimal clinical management. A validated scoring system might help clinicians and researchers in everyday assessment and management of patients or the development and assessment of new therapies. The aim of the present review was to critically appraise the published literature of wound scoring systems for diabetic foot ulcers. METHODS: An electronic search was performed using the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from 1966 until 2009 for scoring systems for diabetic foot ulcers. The literature review conformed to PRISMA statement standards. RESULTS: The literature search identified 197 articles, of which 180 were excluded. Eleven scoring systems and six validation or comparative studies are described. CONCLUSIONS: Many scoring systems exist for classification of the diabetic foot, few of which have been validated. Detailed scoring systems offer a valuable method for the comparison of data from different diabetic foot centres. Simplistic scoring systems may be used in clinical practice and the choice of scoring system should be determined by the population under study.
AIMS: Foot ulcers are a common and important complication of diabetes. Variation in the clinical presentation of this disease has resulted in a paucity of evidence from comparable studies to guide optimal clinical management. A validated scoring system might help clinicians and researchers in everyday assessment and management of patients or the development and assessment of new therapies. The aim of the present review was to critically appraise the published literature of wound scoring systems for diabetic foot ulcers. METHODS: An electronic search was performed using the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from 1966 until 2009 for scoring systems for diabetic foot ulcers. The literature review conformed to PRISMA statement standards. RESULTS: The literature search identified 197 articles, of which 180 were excluded. Eleven scoring systems and six validation or comparative studies are described. CONCLUSIONS: Many scoring systems exist for classification of the diabetic foot, few of which have been validated. Detailed scoring systems offer a valuable method for the comparison of data from different diabetic foot centres. Simplistic scoring systems may be used in clinical practice and the choice of scoring system should be determined by the population under study.
Authors: William A Erdman; Ji Buethe; Rafia Bhore; Hans K Ghayee; Chiarra Thompson; Param Maewal; Jon Anderson; Steve Klemow; Orhan K Oz Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-06-20 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Zhenmi Liu; Jo C Dumville; Robert J Hinchliffe; Nicky Cullum; Fran Game; Nikki Stubbs; Michael Sweeting; Frank Peinemann Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-10-17