4.6 Article

Risk factors for the recurrence of diabetic foot ulcers among diabetic patients: a meta-analysis

期刊

INTERNATIONAL WOUND JOURNAL
卷 16, 期 6, 页码 1373-1382

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13200

关键词

diabetic foot ulcer; meta-analysis; recurrence; risk factor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to systematically review and identify the risk factors for the recurrence of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) among diabetic patients. PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China Biology Medicine (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, and VIP databases were electronically searched to identify eligible studies updated to January 2019 to collect case-control studies or cohort studies on the risk factors for the recurrence of DFUs. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3. Nine retrospective cohort studies were included, in which 1426 patients were enrolled, 542 in the DFU recurrence group and 884 in the non-recurrent DFU group. Risk factors for the recurrence of DFUs included male gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.78, P < .05), smoking (OR = 1.66, 95% CI, 1.26-2.20, P = .0004), duration of diabetes (OR = 4.43, 95% CI, 1.96-6.90, P = .0004), duration of past DFUs (OR = 1.02, 95% CI, 1.00-1.03, P = .006), plantar ulcers (OR = 5.31, 95% CI, 4.93-5.72, P <.00001), peripheral artery disease (OR = 1.65, 95% CI, 1.20-2.28, P = .002), and diabetic peripheral neuropathy (OR = 2.15, 95% CI, 1.40-3.30, P = .0005). No significant differences were found in age, body mass index, total cholesterol, diabetic nephropathy, diabetic retinopathy, or hypertension. Health care staff should pay attention to the identified risk factors for the recurrence of DFUs. Because of the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, rigorous studies with adequate sample sizes are needed to verify the conclusion.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据