Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40877921›Full record

ArticleJournal of foot and ankle research2025

Foot Disease Management by General Practitioners in People With and Without Diabetes: An Analysis of Nationally Representative Primary Care Data in Australia.

Peter A Lazzarini, Hylton B Menz, Cylie M Williams, Julie Gordon, Susanna Cramb, Christopher Harrison

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Peter A LazzariniAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Translation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8235-7964
Hylton B MenzDiscipline of Podiatry, School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Cylie M WilliamsSchool of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Frankston, Australia.
Julie GordonWHO-CC for Strengthening Rehabilitation Capacity in Health Systems, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Susanna CrambAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Translation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Christopher HarrisonMenzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

AbbottAbbVieAstraZenecaAventisBayerbioCSLCilagDepartment of Health and Aged Care, Australian GovernmentDepartment of Veterans' Affairs, Australian GovernmentGlaxoSmithKline AustraliaMerck Sharp and Dohme AustraliaNational Health and Medical Research Council 1135995National Health and Medical Research Council 1143435National Health and Medical Research Council 2008313National Prescribing ServiceNovartis AustraliaPfizer AustraliaRocheSanofi AustraliaWyeth
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFoot disease is a leading cause of national disease burdens and is driven by diabetes. General practitioners (GPs) play a gatekeeper role in many national healthcare systems. Yet, national foot disease management by GPs has not been explored. We explored the management of foot disease by Australian GPs in people with and without diabetes.

methodsWe analysed 16 years of annual, cross-sectional, GP encounter data from the nationally representative Australian Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health study in which a foot disease problem was managed. Factors independently associated with foot disease encounters by GPs were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

resultsFoot disease management rates increased from 11.6 per 1000 GP encounters (95% CI: 10.8-12.5) in 2000-2001 to 14.4 (13.3-15.4) in 2015-2016 and 6.1 (5.7-6.6) to 8.7 (8.1-9.3) per 100 Australian people. The rate of GP foot disease management was 2.4-fold higher in people with diabetes compared to those without diabetes (31.5 [26.4-36.6] vs. 12.9 [11.8-14.0]). Foot disease encounters were positively associated with diabetes, male patients, older patients, English-speaking backgrounds and having healthcare concession cards (all, p < 0.05); for patients with diabetes, only males were positively associated. Most frequent management actions used were medications, procedures and pathology with referrals, counselling and imaging least frequent.

conclusionsAustralian GP management rates for foot disease are higher than many more well-known health conditions and increasing. GPs frequently manage foot disease with medications and procedures, but relatively rarely counsel or refer. Future strategies to improve GP foot disease management and referrals are needed.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic FootFoot DiseasesGeneral PractitionersPractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareAdultAgedAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesDisease ManagementFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Ageddiabetic footfoot diseasefoot ulcersgeneral practiceprimary care

Identifiers

PMID40877921
PMCPMC12394062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.