BACKGROUND: Plantar pressure is a cause of foot ulceration in diabetes. Attempts to determine a pressure threshold have failed. The aim of this study was to determine a pedographic classification to identify patients at risk for a foot ulcer. METHODS: 210 diabetics and controls categorized into 4 groups with deformities of the forefoot were analyzed. For the pedographic measurement peak pressure, force and their integrals were analyzed using a percentage and an anatomic mask. A multivariant logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Logistic regression analysis using pedographic variables of a percentage mask revealed a combination of 4 variables (pressure time integral forefoot, peak pressure midfoot, pressure time integral heel, and peak pressure heel) identifying the foot ulcer with a sensitivity of 73% and a specificity of 87%. The analysis using an anatomic mask identified 8 variables (pressure time integral mask 4 (metatarsal 2), force mask 9 (2. toe), force time integral mask 8 (great toe), peak pressure mask 6 (metatarsal 4), pressure time integral mask 6 (metatarsal 4), peak pressure mask 8 (great toe), peak pressure mask 7 (metatarsal 5), and force mask 6 (metatarsal 4)) that characterized a pedal ulcer with a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 90%. CONCLUSION: This screening method identifies diabetics who are at risk for a foot ulcer.
BACKGROUND: Plantar pressure is a cause of foot ulceration in diabetes. Attempts to determine a pressure threshold have failed. The aim of this study was to determine a pedographic classification to identify patients at risk for a foot ulcer. METHODS: 210 diabetics and controls categorized into 4 groups with deformities of the forefoot were analyzed. For the pedographic measurement peak pressure, force and their integrals were analyzed using a percentage and an anatomic mask. A multivariant logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Logistic regression analysis using pedographic variables of a percentage mask revealed a combination of 4 variables (pressure time integral forefoot, peak pressure midfoot, pressure time integral heel, and peak pressure heel) identifying the foot ulcer with a sensitivity of 73% and a specificity of 87%. The analysis using an anatomic mask identified 8 variables (pressure time integral mask 4 (metatarsal 2), force mask 9 (2. toe), force time integral mask 8 (great toe), peak pressure mask 6 (metatarsal 4), pressure time integral mask 6 (metatarsal 4), peak pressure mask 8 (great toe), peak pressure mask 7 (metatarsal 5), and force mask 6 (metatarsal 4)) that characterized a pedal ulcer with a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 90%. CONCLUSION: This screening method identifies diabetics who are at risk for a foot ulcer.
Authors: Yi Li; Ji Wu; Chao Zheng; Rong Rong Huang; Yuhong Na; Fan Yang; Zengshun Wang; Di Wu Journal: J Sports Sci Med Date: 2013-09-01 Impact factor: 2.988
Authors: Kevin Deschamps; Giovanni Arnoldo Matricali; Philip Roosen; Kaat Desloovere; Herman Bruyninckx; Pieter Spaepen; Frank Nobels; Jos Tits; Mieke Flour; Filip Staes Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-11-22 Impact factor: 3.240