Comparison of 4, 8, and 12 week screening and foot care frequencies in persons in remission: The DIATIME comparative efficacy study – A randomized clinical trial

Aims This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of 1, 2, and 3 months-based screening periods for the prevention of plantar DFUs in patients in remission. Methods A randomized, three-arm, controlled trial was conducted in 148 patients at high – risk in remission with a healed plantar foot ul...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: López Moral, Mateo, García-Madrid Martín De Almagro, Marta, García Morales, Esther Alicia, García Álvarez, Yolanda, Álvaro Afonso, Francisco Javier, Lázaro Martínez, José Luis
Formato: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2025
País:España
Recursos:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
Repositorio:Docta Complutense
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/132765
Acesso em linha:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/132765
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:616.718.7/.9
Diabetic foot
Diabetic foot ulcer
Prevention
Podología
3299 Otras Especialidades Médicas
Descrição
Resumo:Aims This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of 1, 2, and 3 months-based screening periods for the prevention of plantar DFUs in patients in remission. Methods A randomized, three-arm, controlled trial was conducted in 148 patients at high – risk in remission with a healed plantar foot ulcer. For the three treatment groups, the procedures were the same; the only difference was the screening timeframe: group 1, 4 weeks; group 2, 8 weeks; and group 3, 12 weeks. Primary outcome measure was the percentage of participants with plantar recurrence by the 1-year follow-up period. Results During the 12-month follow-up period, 50 participants (33.8 %) experienced a recurrence. We observed that participants in the 12-weeks group experience DFU recurrence significantly more frequently (n = 27, 46 %) than the 4-weeks (n = 18, 18.4 %) and 8-weeks (n = 14, 28.6 %) groups (P < 0.001). Ulcer survival curves significantly differed between the study groups (log-rank test, P < 0.001). In the logistic regression model, allocation was the only variable associated with ulcer recurrence during the 1-year follow-up period (P < 0.001, 95 % confidence interval:1.509–4.001). Conclusions This trial found superior clinical efficacy in preventing plantar recurrence rates with the 4-weeks screening period compared to 8 and 12 weeks. This trial was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (identifier ID NCT06143215) within the Unique Protocol ID name of the Diatime randomized controlled clinical trial.