4.7 Article

Trends in Lower-Extremity Amputations in People With and Without Diabetes in Spain, 2001-2008

期刊

DIABETES CARE
卷 34, 期 7, 页码 1570-1576

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/dc11-0077

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias [PI10/00360]
  2. Institut de Salud Carlos III

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE-To examine trends in nontraumatic lower-extremity amputations (LEAs) over an 8-year period in patients with and without diabetes in Spain. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS-We identified all patients who underwent an LEA using national hospital discharge data. Discharges were grouped by diabetes status: type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, and no diabetes. The incidence of discharges attributed to amputations were calculated overall and stratified by diabetes status and year. We calculated length of stay and in-hospital fatality stratified by diabetes status and type of LEA. RESULTS-From 2001 to 2008, 46,536 minor LEAs and 43,528 major LEAs were performed. In patients with type 1 diabetes, the incidence of minor and major amputations decreased significantly from 2001 to 2008 (0.88-0.43 per 100,000 inhabitants and 0.59-0.22 per 100,000 inhabitants, respectively). In patients with type 2 diabetes, the incidence of minor and major LEAs increased significantly (9.23-10.9 per 100,000 inhabitants and 7.12-7.47 per 100,000 inhabitants). Hospital stay was similar among type 1 diabetic and type 2 diabetic subjects, according to the type of LEA. Only in-hospital mortality for minor LEAs among type 1 diabetic subjects decreased significantly (4.0% in 2001 vs. 1.6% in 2008). CONCLUSIONS-Our national data show a decrease in the incidence of major and minor LEAs in patients with type 1 diabetes and an increase among patients with type 2 diabetes. Further improvement is necessary in the preventive care and early treatment of patients with diabetes. The management of foot lesions, especially among type 2 diabetic patients, is particularly urgent.

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

4.7
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