Literature DB >> 29220878

A qualitative study of the experience of lower extremity wounds and amputations among people with diabetes in Philadelphia.

Frances K Barg1,2, Peter F Cronholm1, Ebony E Easley1, Trocon Davis1, Michelle Hampton2, D Scot Malay1, Cornelius Donohue3, Jinsup Song4, Stephen R Thom5, David J Margolis1,2.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore perceptions among people with type 2 diabetes about foot ulcers and lower extremity amputations. This was a qualitative observational study utilizing open-ended, semistructured interviews of 39 people with diabetes who were purposively selected because they had either a foot ulcer (n = 19) or a lower extremity amputation (n = 20). Interviews were audio-recorded, deidentified, and entered into NVivo 10.0 for coding and analysis. Our integrated analytic approach combined inductively and deductively derived codes that were applied to all transcripts. Coded data were summarized and examined for patterns. Participants' description of the relationship between diabetes and their foot ulcer or amputation revealed a limited understanding of the disease process. Disruption and loss of independence was expressed whether the person had a foot ulcer or an amputation. Treatment recommendations for foot ulcers were viewed by most as extremely difficult. Amputation was a feared outcome, but some learned to adapt and, at times felt that the amputation enhanced their quality of life. Clinicians have assumed that a focus on limb salvage is preferred over a major amputation. However, because of the complexity of care requiring frequent healthcare provider visits, the frequency of care failure, the frequency of recurrence, and mortality associated with having had a foot ulcer, it may be more appropriate for clinicians to prioritize quality-of-life salvage. Foot ulcer treatment failure may be due to a lack of providers' understanding of the impact of treatment on a patient's life.
© 2017 by the Wound Healing Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29220878     DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12593

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wound Repair Regen        ISSN: 1067-1927            Impact factor:   3.617


  5 in total

1.  Effects of training podiatrists to use imagery-based motivational interviewing when treating people with diabetes-related foot disease: a mixed-methods pilot study.

Authors:  Tracey Kaczmarek; Jaap J Van Netten; Peter A Lazzarini; David Kavanagh
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 2.303

2.  Thoughts and experiences on leg amputation among patients with diabetic foot ulcers.

Authors:  Marie Kragh Nielsen; Heidi Bergenholtz; Ulla Riis Madsen
Journal:  Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being       Date:  2022-12

3.  Risk factors and incidence over time for lower extremity amputations in people with type 1 diabetes: an observational cohort study of 46,088 patients from the Swedish National Diabetes Registry.

Authors:  Sara Hallström; Ann-Marie Svensson; Aldina Pivodic; Arndís F Ólafsdóttir; Magnus Löndahl; Hans Wedel; Marcus Lind
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 10.122

4.  Exploring the barriers of patients with diabetic foot complications in China: a qualitative interview study.

Authors:  Xiaoli Liu; Hongling Chu; Jinghui Zhao; Rui Qiao; Yuqiang Liu; Nan Li; Lin Zeng; Xiaoxiao Wang; Liyuan Tao; Hua Zhang; Yanyan Shi; Lin Zhuo; Long Zhang; Yiming Zhao
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-05

5.  Assessment of telomerase activity in leukocytes of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients having or not foot ulcer: Possible correlation with other clinical parameters.

Authors:  Dimitrios Baltzis; Evangelia Meimeti; Maria G Grammatikopoulou; Matthieu Roustit; Eleni Mavrogonatou; Dimitris Kletsas; Smaragda Efraimidou; Christos Manes; Taxiarchis K Nikolouzakis; John Tsiaoussis; Aristides M Tsatsakis; Demetrios A Spandidos; Christina-Maria Trakatelli; Nikolaos Drakoulis
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 2.447

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.