Exercise Training for People With Diabetes-related Foot Ulcers: A Systematic Review of Glycemia, Fitness, and Wound-healing Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Regular physical activity is a key, patient-centred therapy for people with diabetes to manage their glycemia. The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot recommends optimization of glycemic management for people with/at risk of diabetes-related foot ulcer (DFU); however, people with DFU are commonly instructed by clinicians to avoid physical activity so as not to worsen the ulcer. The effects of exercise on glycemia, fitness, and wound healing in people with active DFU are not clear. In this study we examined the effects of regular exercise (training) on glycemia, cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength, metabolic health, and ulcer healing in adults with diabetes and an active foot ulcer. METHODS: Online databases and reference lists of included studies were searched from earliest records to December 2023. Studies involving adult populations with DFU and incorporating interventions of exercise training were included. Data were extracted independently by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: Of the 5,592 studies screened, 8 were included, with a total of 213 participants. Exercise interventions involved foot range-of-movement exercises and/or aerobic and/or resistance-type exercise. None of the studies reported on cardiorespiratory fitness or anthropometry and limited data were available for glycemic and muscular strength outcomes. Interpretation of data on safety, wound healing, and adherence to exercise were limited due to inconsistent reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some data that exercise may have a positive impact on wound healing, evidence regarding its benefits and safety is significantly lacking, despite metabolic (particularly glycemic) and fitness outcomes being core to the rationale for exercise therapy in diabetes. Given the importance of exercise in current management guidelines for diabetes, and the plausibility of positive health effects of exercise training for people with DFU, there is a need for research to move from foot-focussed to person-centred outcomes to better inform the implementation of exercise therapy for people with DFU.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".