ArticleCureus2021
Outpatient Management of Diabetic Hand Infections.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A hard-to-heal wound: a case study on the collaboration between nonprofit and Public Health Sector in Southern Italy.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2025Article
- Renal disease and diabetes increase the risk of failed outpatient management of cellulitic hand infections: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose For many providers, hand infections among diabetic patients is a condition that necessitates focused inpatient care. These patients are believed to have decreased innate immunity to fight infection, a more virulent course, and difficulty with recovery. Diabetes is considered by some to represent an additional risk factor that can result in an unfavorable outcome if not managed in an aggressive manner. Our own experience suggests that many of these patients can be safely managed in the outpatient setting. The purpose of this project was to better define the clinical outcomes for this population. Methods Evidence-based criteria were utilized to direct inpatient versus outpatient treatment pathways. A database was developed to track hand infections treated by the specialty service. The primary outcome was the resolution of hand infection. Secondary outcomes included specific treatment responses as well as patient characteristic comparisons of the different treatment groups. Independent variables included (parenteral and enteral) antibiotic use and bedside interventions performed. Patients were followed to complete the resolution of infection. Results For all patients managed as outpatients, diabetic patients had statistically significantly decreased improvement rates at two weeks as compared to non-diabetic patients (62% vs 75%, p =0.024). This difference disappeared at two months. Among diabetic patients, those with the highest rate of recovery at two weeks (90%) received intravenous antibiotics, bedside procedures, and oral antibiotics. Patients who did not receive antibiotics or undergo bedside procedures had the lowest percent of improvement (37%). Across all treatment subgroups, bedside procedure was the most impactful intervention. Less than 10% of patients were converted from outpatient to inpatient care, both diabetic and non-diabetic. Conclusions We reviewed our experience managing diabetes mellitus hand infections treated in the outpatient setting. Appropriate and effective treatment is possible, and the results are equivalent to those of patients without diabetes mellitus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.