Validity of DMIST for monitoring healing of diabetic foot ulcers.
Journal
Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society
ISSN: 1524-475X
Titre abrégé: Wound Repair Regen
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9310939
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
received:
28
04
2019
revised:
17
03
2020
accepted:
30
03
2020
pubmed:
14
4
2020
medline:
22
7
2021
entrez:
14
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A new diabetic foot evaluation scale was proposed, using the seven domains of depth, maceration, inflammation/infection, size, tissue type of the wound bed, type of wound edge, and tunneling/undermining. This scale was named "DMIST" as an acronym from the initials of the domains. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of DMIST. Secondary analysis was conducted in three investigations performed using the diabetic foot ulcer assessment scale (DFUAS) in Japan and Indonesia. Secondary analysis was assessed using DMIST, PUSH, and DESIGN for 4 weeks based on DFUAS score and photographs of diabetic foot ulcers by researchers. Concurrent validity was determined from the correlation of total DMIST scores with PUSH and DESIGN scores. Construct validity was determined by comparisons between total DMIST score and grade of the Wagner classification. Predictive validity was determined by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for wound non-healing 4 weeks later. Subjects comprised 35 Japanese patients and 118 Indonesian patients. Correlations of total DMIST score with PUSH and DESIGN scores were 0.831 and 0.822, respectively. Comparison of total DMIST scores with grade of the Wagner classification (Grade I vs. Grade II/III vs. Grade IV/V) was p < 0.001. Based on an area under the curve of 0.872, a DMIST score of 9 was selected as a cut-off, offering sensitivity of 0.855 and specificity of 0.786 for wound non-healing 4 weeks later. Our findings suggest that DMIST offers high validity.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
539-546Informations de copyright
© 2020 by the Wound Healing Society.
Références
The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot. Definitions & criteria 2015 http://iwgdf.org/guidelines/definitions-criteria-2015/ (last accessed January 3, 2019)
Frykberg RG, Zgonis T, Armstrong DG, et al. Diabetic foot disorders. A clinical practice guideline (2006 revision). J Foot Ankle Surg. 2006;45(5):S1-66.
Resnick HE, Carter EA, Lindsay R, et al. Relation of lower-extremity amputation to all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality in American Indians: the strong heart study. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(6):1286-1293.
Ragnarson Tennvall G, Apelqvist J. Health-related quality of life in patients with diabetes mellitus and foot ulcers. J Diabetes Complications. 2000;14:235-241.
Nabuurs-Franssen MH, Huijberts MS, Nieuwenhuijzen Kruseman AC, Willems J, Schaper NC. Health-related quality of life of diabetic foot ulcer patients and their caregivers. Diabetologia. 2005;48:1906-1910.
Schaper NC. Diabetic foot ulcer classification system for research purposes: a progress report on criteria for including patients in research studies. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2004 May-Jun;20(Suppl 1):S90-95.
Armstrong DG. The University of Texas diabetic foot classification system. Ostomy Wound Manage. 1996 Sep;42(8):60-61.
Wagner FW Jr. The dysvascular foot: a system for diagnosis and treatment. Foot Ankle. 1981 Sep;2(2):64-122.
Macfarlane RM, Jeffcoate WJ. Classification of diabetic foot ulcers: the S(AD) SAD system. Diabetic Foot. 1999;2:123-131.
Martínez-De Jesús FR. A checklist system to score healing progress of diabetic foot ulcers. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2010 Jun;9(2):74-83.
Mills JL Sr, Conte MS, Armstrong DG, et al. The Society for Vascular Surgery Lower Extremity Threatened Limb Classification System: risk stratification based on wound, ischemia, and foot infection (WIfI). J Vasc Surg. 2014 Jan;59(1):220-234.
Terashi H, Kitano I, Tsuji Y. Total management of diabetic foot ulcerations - Kobe classification as a new classification of diabetic foot wounds. Keio J Med. 2011;60(1):17-21.
Sanada H, Moriguchi T, Miyachi Y, et al. Reliability and validity of DESIGN, a tool that classifies pressure ulcer severity and monitors healing. J Wound Care. 2004;13(1):13-18.
The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH). PUSH Tool 3.0. http://www.npuap.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/push3.pdf. (last accessed January 3, 2019)
Harris C, Bates-Jensen B, Parslow N, Raizman R, Singh M, Ketchen R. Bates-Jensen wound assessment tool: pictorial guide validation project. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2010;37(3):253-259.
Arisandi D, Oe M, Roselyne Yotsu R, et al. Evaluation of validity of the new diabetic foot ulcer assessment scale in Indonesia. Wound Repair Regen. 2016;24(5):876-884.
Oe M, Yotsu RR, Sanada H, Nagase T, Tamaki T. Thermographic findings in a case of type 2 diabetes with foot ulcer and osteomyelitis. J Wound Care. 2012;21(6):274-278.
Oe M, Yotsu R, Sanada H, Nagase T, Tamaki T. Screening for osteomyelitis using thermography in patients with diabetic foot. Ulcers. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/284294.
Darling JD, McCallum JC, Soden PA, et al. Predictive ability of the society for vascular surgery wound, ischemia, and foot infection (WIfI) classification system after first-time lower extremity revascularizations. J Vasc Surg. 2017;65(3):695-704.