ArticlePloS one2024
Healthcare workers' perspectives on diabetic foot complications among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Fiji.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiabetic Foot Complications (DFCs) are a growing cause of morbidity and mortality with less than one third of physicians able to discern the signs of diabetes related peripheral neuropathy. DFCs and resultant amputations account for a considerable proportion of surgeries in Fiji, with very limited literature available to verify the factors that influence these alarming figures. This study aimed to explore Health Care Workers' (HCWs) perspectives on diabetic foot complications and challenges of foot care management in Fiji.
methodAn exploratory descriptive qualitative design was used among HCWs at the Sigatoka Sub Divisional Hospital (SDH), Fiji in 2021. HCWs at the SDH were required to have a minimum work experience of at least six months in public health. All participants who met the inclusion criteria were selected through purposive sampling. Data was collected using a focus group discussion guide composed of semi-structured open-ended questions to guide the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs). Focus discussions were audio recorded and transcribed with thematic analysis applied to derive the themes and sub-themes outlined in the study.
resultsTwenty HCWs participated in four FGDs with four major themes identified. The first theme was HCWs' perceptions and practice of foot care which revealed that all participants had adequate diabetic foot care knowledge. The second theme was factors affecting foot care which was mainly focused on identified barriers such as inadequate patient foot care knowledge, the lack of resources such as manpower, and health system challenges like the COVID-19 pandemic. The third theme is creating awareness among patients and HCWs to improve foot care practices. The fourth theme is strengthening foot care practices at the different levels of health care that is aimed at optimizing diabetic foot outcomes.
conclusionVarious foot care barriers namely patient factors and the lack of resources is a concern depicted in this study. There is a need to address health system barriers and enforce diabetic foot education, screening and care for patients and the community.
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.