Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

Richard, J.L., Lavigne, J.P., Got, I., et al. (2011) Management of Patients Hospitalized for Diabetic Foot Infection: Results of the French OPIDIA Study. Diabetes & Metabolism, 37, 208-215.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabet.2010.10.003

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Assessment of the Podiatric Risk on Diabetics in Dakar Hospital Area: Cross-Sectional Study in Regard to 142 Patients

    AUTHORS: Abdoulaye Leye, Ngone Diaba Diack, Yakham Mohamed Leye, Nafy Ndiaye, Alex Bahati, Ameth Dieng, Daouda Thioub, Maïmouna Senghor, Maouly Fall, Samira Elfajri

    KEYWORDS: Foot Risk, Diabetes, Dakar

    JOURNAL NAME: Journal of Diabetes Mellitus, Vol.8 No.1, January 16, 2018

    ABSTRACT: The prevention of diabetic foot goes through a systematic podiatric assessment of diabetic patients permitting to identify the foot at risk. Then, we realized a study in the Internal Medicine Department at Pikine Teaching Hospital in Dakar with the assessment of foot risk on admitted diabetic patients as our main objective. Methods: It was about a prospective cross-sectional, descriptive and analytic study done on 18 months period. Results: Overall, 142 patients were gathered. The average age was 56.22 years and the sex-ratio was 0.67. 87.2% of the patients were running type 2 diabetes. The capillary blood glucose and glycated hemoglobin were respectively around 3.24 g/L and 9%. High Blood Pressure was found in 62% of cases. The type of footwear most used by our patients was sandals (96.3%). Also, 30.6% of patients walked barefoot. Prior ulceration and/or amputation were noted in 30% of cases. During the foot examination, a lesion was found in 15.5% of patients. Loss of monofilament sensitivity was about 66.7%. The Ankle-Brachial Index (ABI) less than 0.9 was recorded in 34% of patients and at least a quarter of patients were posteriorly tibial pulselessness. The gradation of the foot risk according to the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) was established as follow: grade 0 (58%), grade 1 (9.8%), grade 2 (14.3%), grade 3 (17.3%). The presence of neuropathy (OR 12. 162 [3.368 - 43.923]; p = 0.000), plantar keratosis (OR 2.87 [1.119 - 7.399]; p = 0.024) and the absence of pulse perception (OR 9.00 [3.205 - 25.414]; p = 0.000) were significant associated factors of foot injury occurrence on our patients. Conclusion: The prevention of diabetic foot in emerging countries is accessible by a systematic clinical examination of all diabetic feet and the awareness of adapted footwear.