Awareness regarding foot self-care practices among diabetic patients in Northeast part of India. Can primary care physician make a difference? A hospital based cross-sectional study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: About 10% of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus at the time of diagnosis have more than one risk factor for developing foot ulceration, and it increases to 15% in a lifetime. The risk of development of Diabetic foot ulcers/gangrene can be prevented by the patient's self-foot care practice at home. The present study aimed to determine the prevalence of awareness of self-foot care practice among diabetic patients in a rural setting. The study also aimed to identify the factors preventing dry or wet diabetic gangrene development and subsequent amputation. Methods: A hospital-based cross-sectional study was carried out among 1687 people with diabetes mellitus (DM) who attended orthopedic and diabetic OPD in a tertiary care hospital in Kamrup, Assam, India. An appropriate self-explanatory questionnaire about knowledge of self-foot care practice was given to all study participants. Foot examination was performed by authors participated in the study on all patients. The observations and results were categorized according to the International Diabetes Federation foot risk categories. Results: Of 1687 patients included in this study, 298 (17.7%) had foot ulcers of various grades, 164 (9.76%) had peripheral vascular disease, and 484 (28.7%), had peripheral neuropathy of different grades. After multivariate analysis, patients on insulin and combination therapy and peripheral neuropathy were significantly associated with the presence of foot ulcers. The mean knowledge score was as low as 9.7 ± 4.8 out of a total score of 23. Low awareness and knowledge were associated with low mean scores due to a lack of formal education (8.3 ± 6.1). Among the 1687 patients, only 381 (22.5%) are aware and have some knowledge about self-foot care, and 686 (40.6%) had their feet examined by a doctor only once since their initial diagnosis. The incidence of development of diabetic-related complications was significantly low in those who know about foot self-care as well as those whose feet had been inspected by a physician at least once. Conclusion: The incidence of development of diabetic-related complications was significantly low in those who know about foot self-care as well as those whose feet had been examined by a physician of family doctors at least once. There is a need to educate all patients of diabetes about self-foot care. It is prudent to establish an integrated foot care services within primary care centers and in the diabetic clinic to identify feet at risk, institute early preventive measures, and provide continuous foot care education through images videos on WhatsApp to patients and primary health care givers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».