Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31423317›Full record

ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2019

Unilateral remote temperature monitoring to predict future ulceration for the diabetic foot in remission.

Lawrence A Lavery, Brian J Petersen, David R Linders, Jonathan D Bloom, Gary M Rothenberg, David G Armstrong

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Remote Temperature Monitoring of the Diabetic Foot: From Research to Practice.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2020
    Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lawrence A LaveryDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Brian J PetersenPodimetrics, Inc, Somerville, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9552-5859
David R LindersPodimetrics, Inc, Somerville, Massachusetts, USA.
Jonathan D BloomPodimetrics, Inc, Somerville, Massachusetts, USA.
Gary M RothenbergDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
David G ArmstrongDepartment of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of Michigan · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Daily remote foot temperature monitoring is an evidence-based preventive practice for patients at risk for diabetic foot complications. Unfortunately, the conventional approach requires comparison of temperatures between contralaterally matched anatomy, limiting practice in high-risk cohorts such as patients with a wound to one foot and those with proximal lower extremity amputation (LEA). We developed and assessed a novel approach for monitoring of a single foot for the prevention and early detection of diabetic foot complications. The purpose of this study was to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and lead time associated with unilateral diabetic foot temperature monitoring. Research design and methods: We used comparisons among ipsilateral foot temperatures and between foot temperatures and ambient temperature as a marker of inflammation. We analyzed data collected from a 129-participant longitudinal study to evaluate the predictive accuracy of our approach. To evaluate classification accuracy, we constructed a receiver operator characteristic curve and reported sensitivity, specificity, and lead time for four different monitoring settings. Results: Using this approach, monitoring a single foot was found to predict 91% of impending non-acute plantar foot ulcers on average 41 days before clinical presentation with a resultant mean 4.2 alerts per participant-year. By adjusting the threshold temperature setting, the specificity could be increased to 78% with corresponding reduced sensitivity of 53%, lead time of 33 days, and 2.2 alerts per participant-year. Conclusions: Given the high incidence of subsequent diabetic foot complications to the sound foot in patients with a history of proximal LEA and patients being treated for a wound, practice of daily temperature monitoring of a single foot has the potential to significantly improve outcomes and reduce resource utilization in this challenging high-risk population.

Indexed as

Skin TemperatureDiabetic FootFollow-Up StudiesHumansLongitudinal StudiesMonitoring, PhysiologicPrognosisRemission InductionRisk Assessmentfoot ulcerationpreventionremote monitoring

Identifiers

PMID31423317
PMCPMC6688693
OpenAlexW2965369250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.