4.3 Review

Lower extremity amputations - a review of global variability in incidence

Journal

DIABETIC MEDICINE
Volume 28, Issue 10, Pages 1144-1153

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03279.x

Keywords

amputation; diabetes; ethnicity; incidence; reporting

Funding

  1. Dunhill Medical Foundation/Royal College of Surgeons of England
  2. National Institute for Health Research [CL-2007-16-002] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim To quantify global variation in the incidence of lower extremity amputations in light of the rising prevalence of diabetes mellitus. Methods An electronic search was performed using the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from 1989 until 2010 for incidence of lower extremity amputation. The literature review conformed to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement standards. Results Incidence of all forms of lower extremity amputation ranges from 46.1 to 9600 per 10(5) in the population with diabetes compared with 5.8-31 per 10(5) in the total population. Major amputation ranges from 5.6 to 600 per 10(5) in the population with diabetes and from 3.6 to 68.4 per 10(5) in the total population. Significant reductions in incidence of lower extremity amputation have been shown in specific at-risk populations after the introduction of specialist diabetic foot clinics. Conclusion Significant global variation exists in the incidence of lower extremity amputation. Ethnicity and social deprivation play a significant role but it is the role of diabetes and its complications that is most profound. Lower extremity amputation reporting methods demonstrate significant variation with no single standard upon which to benchmark care. Effective standardized reporting methods of major, minor and at-risk populations are needed in order to quantify and monitor the growing multidisciplinary team effect on lower extremity amputation rates globally.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available