Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34194257›Full record

ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2021

Knowledge and practice of foot self-care among patients with diabetes attending primary healthcare centres in Kuwait: A cross-sectional study.

Fatemah M Alsaleh, Khaled S AlBassam, Zahra K Alsairafi, Abdallah Y Naser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Diabetic Foot Assessment and Care: Barriers and Facilitators in a Cross-Sectional Study in Bangalore, India.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

4 authors.

Fatemah M AlsalehDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait.
Khaled S AlBassamDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait.
Zahra K AlsairafiDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait.
Abdallah Y NaserDepartment of Applied Pharmaceutical Sciences and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Isra University, Amman, Jordan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetes mellitus is a major public health issue and is the main cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. At the time of diagnosis, many patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) have one or two risk factors for diabetic foot diseases, such as diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Patients can overcome such complications through good knowledge and practice of foot self-care. This study aims to evaluate the knowledge and practice of foot care among patients with diabetes mellitus attending primary healthcare centres (PHCs) in Kuwait and to identify those at risk for developing DPN.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using a pre-tested self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire included questions on demographic characteristics and patients' knowledge and practices of foot care. Adult patients (aged 21 and above) with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus for at least 1 year were randomly selected from PHCs located in the five governorates of Kuwait. Data were analysed using SPSS, version 26.

resultsA total of 357 patients participated in this study, giving a response rate of 87.3%. The overall mean knowledge score of foot care was 12.7 ± 2.7 (equals 81.3%). Most patients (n = 283, 79.3%) showed good knowledge. In comparison, less than one-third of patients (n = 110, 30.8%) practiced good foot care. The overall mean score of patients' practices was 55.7 ± 9.2 (equals 64.0%). Approximately 17.4% of the patients had a higher risk of developing DPN. University students had lower odds of having good knowledge about foot care [OR: 0.19 (95%CI: 0.04-0.86)]. On the other hand, patients who reported having diabetes for a long duration (10 years and above) [OR: 1.88 (95%CI: 1.11-3.18)] and patients who did not have any other comorbidities [OR: 0.49 (95%CI: 0.26-0.90)] had higher odds of having good foot care knowledge. Patients who were on oral hypoglycaemic agents (OHAs) only had lower odds [OR: 0.63 (95%CI: 0.39-1.00)] of practicing good foot care. Patients who reported having diabetes for a duration between 5 to less than 10 years [OR: 1.75 (95%CI: 1.06-2.90)] and those who are on a diet only [OR: 1.76 (95%CI: 1.06-2.94)] had higher odds of practicing good foot care. Patients who were using combination therapy with OHAs and insulin had a higher risk [OR: 2.67 (95%CI: 1.11-6.41)] of developing DPN. On the other hand, patients who reported that they did not have a previous history of foot ulcer had a lower risk of developing DPN [OR: 0.21 (95%CI: 0.09-0.47)].

conclusionThe knowledge of patients with diabetes regarding foot care is rated as good, while their self-practice is considered satisfactory. To improve the foot care knowledge and self-care practice of patients, healthcare providers (HCPs) need to support patients through educational programmes and appropriate training.

Indexed as

Diabetes mellitusFoot careKnowledgePeripheral neuropathyPractice

Identifiers

PMID34194257
PMCPMC8233518

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.