Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 315

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Footwear and offloading interventions to prevent and heal foot ulcers and reduce plantar pressure in patients with diabetes: a systematic review

Open access
Bus, S. A., van Deursen, R. W., Armstrong, D. G., Lewis, J. E. A., Caravaggi, C. F., Cavanagh, P. R., on behalf of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF)·2016·Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews

Abstract

Background: Footwear and offloading techniques are commonly used in clinical practice for preventing and healing of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes. The goal of this systematic review is to assess the medical scientific literature on this topic to better inform clinical practice about effective treatment. Methods: We searched the medical scientific literature indexed in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane database for original research studies published since 1 May 2006 related to four groups of interventions: (1) casting; (2) footwear; (3) surgical offloading; and (4) other offloading interventions. Primary outcomes were ulcer prevention, ulcer healing, and pressure reduction. We reviewed both controlled and non‐controlled studies. Controlled studies were assessed for methodological quality, and extracted key data was presented in evidence and risk of bias tables. Uncontrolled studies were assessed and summarized on a narrative basis. Outcomes are presented and discussed in conjunction with data from our previous systematic review covering the literature from before 1 May 2006. Results: We included two systematic reviews and meta‐analyses, 32 randomized controlled trials, 15 other controlled studies, and another 127 non‐controlled studies. Several randomized controlled trials with low risk of bias show the efficacy of therapeutic footwear that demonstrates to relief plantar pressure and is worn by the patient, in the prevention of plantar foot ulcer recurrence. Two meta‐analyses show non‐removable offloading to be more effective than removable offloading for healing plantar neuropathic forefoot ulcers. Due to the limited number of controlled studies, clear evidence on the efficacy of surgical offloading and felted foam is not yet available. Interestingly, surgical offloading seems more effective in preventing than in healing ulcers. A number of controlled and uncontrolled studies show that plantar pressure can be reduced by several conservative and surgical approaches. Conclusions: Sufficient evidence of good quality supports the use of non‐removable offloading to heal plantar neuropathic forefoot ulcers and therapeutic footwear with demonstrated pressure relief that is worn by the patient to prevent plantar foot ulcer recurrence. The evidence base to support the use of other offloading interventions is still limited and of variable quality. The evidence for the use of interventions to prevent a first foot ulcer or heal ischemic, infected, non‐plantar, or proximal foot ulcers is practically non‐existent. High‐quality controlled studies are needed in these areas.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/dmrr.2702

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Bus, S. A., van Deursen, R. W., Armstrong, D. G., Lewis, J. E. A., Caravaggi, C. F., Cavanagh, P. R., & on behalf of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF)
Venue
Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-01
Volume
32
Issue
S1
Pages
99-118
ISSN
  • 1520-7552 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-7560
OpenAlex
W1905928909
Cited by
315
References
2
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.