A critical literature review highlighting the methodological differences within epidemiological studies: Pedal Amputations in England

Q2 Health Professions Foot Pub Date : 2024-03-11 DOI:10.1016/j.foot.2024.102081
{"title":"A critical literature review highlighting the methodological differences within epidemiological studies: Pedal Amputations in England","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.foot.2024.102081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>There is an absence in the application of standardised epidemiological principles when calculating and reporting on lower extremity amputation (LEA) rates [1]. The rates of minor LEAs in the diabetic population range from 1.2–362.9 per 100,000 and in the population without diabetes 0.9–109.4 per 100,000. The reported rates of major lower limb amputations vary from 5.6–600 per 100,000 in the diabetic population and 3.6–58.7 per 100,000 in the total population [1]. The variation in methodology does not facilitate comparison across populations and time. All studies published using the population from England, UK, describing minor amputations were systematically reviewed and rates and methodologies compared.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A systematic search was carried out using (PRISMA) guidelines [2] to reveal primary data of minor lower extremity amputation rates in England between 1988–2018. This was carried out using electronic databases, grey literature and reference list searching. The search yielded eleven studies that were eligible for review.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Significant variation in the reporting of minor lower extremity amputation rates across regional and gender groups in England was found. Rates in the diabetic and non-diabetic population varied from 1.2 to 362.9 per 100,000 and 0.9 to 109.4 per 100,000 respectively. This was predominately a result of poorly describing numerator and denominator populations and defining minor amputations differently. As a result, there was an inability to confidently establish regional, gender and time trends.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The inconsistent nature of reporting minor amputations makes drawing conclusions on temporal and population change difficult. Future studies should describe and present basic numerator and denominator population characteristics e.g. number, age and sex and use the standard definition of minor amputation as one that is at or below the ankle.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12349,"journal":{"name":"Foot","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0958259224000142","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

There is an absence in the application of standardised epidemiological principles when calculating and reporting on lower extremity amputation (LEA) rates [1]. The rates of minor LEAs in the diabetic population range from 1.2–362.9 per 100,000 and in the population without diabetes 0.9–109.4 per 100,000. The reported rates of major lower limb amputations vary from 5.6–600 per 100,000 in the diabetic population and 3.6–58.7 per 100,000 in the total population [1]. The variation in methodology does not facilitate comparison across populations and time. All studies published using the population from England, UK, describing minor amputations were systematically reviewed and rates and methodologies compared.

Method

A systematic search was carried out using (PRISMA) guidelines [2] to reveal primary data of minor lower extremity amputation rates in England between 1988–2018. This was carried out using electronic databases, grey literature and reference list searching. The search yielded eleven studies that were eligible for review.

Results

Significant variation in the reporting of minor lower extremity amputation rates across regional and gender groups in England was found. Rates in the diabetic and non-diabetic population varied from 1.2 to 362.9 per 100,000 and 0.9 to 109.4 per 100,000 respectively. This was predominately a result of poorly describing numerator and denominator populations and defining minor amputations differently. As a result, there was an inability to confidently establish regional, gender and time trends.

Conclusion

The inconsistent nature of reporting minor amputations makes drawing conclusions on temporal and population change difficult. Future studies should describe and present basic numerator and denominator population characteristics e.g. number, age and sex and use the standard definition of minor amputation as one that is at or below the ankle.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
批判性文献综述,强调流行病学研究在方法上的差异:英格兰的截肢病例
导言在计算和报告下肢截肢(LEA)率时,缺乏标准化流行病学原则的应用[1]。糖尿病患者的轻微下肢截肢率为每 10 万人 1.2-362.9 例,非糖尿病患者的轻微下肢截肢率为每 10 万人 0.9-109.4 例。据报道,糖尿病患者的主要下肢截肢率为每 10 万人 5.6-600 例,而总人口的主要下肢截肢率为每 10 万人 3.6-58.7 例[1]。研究方法的差异不利于对不同人群和不同时间进行比较。我们系统地回顾了英国英格兰地区发表的所有关于轻微截肢的研究,并对截肢率和截肢方法进行了比较。方法采用(PRISMA)指南[2]进行了系统检索,以揭示1988-2018年间英格兰轻微下肢截肢率的原始数据。这项工作通过电子数据库、灰色文献和参考文献目录检索进行。结果发现,英格兰不同地区和性别群体对轻微下肢截肢率的报告存在显著差异。糖尿病患者和非糖尿病患者的截肢率分别为每 10 万人 1.2 至 362.9 例和每 10 万人 0.9 至 109.4 例。这主要是由于对分子和分母人群的描述不清以及对轻微截肢的定义不同造成的。结论由于对轻微截肢的报告不一致,因此很难就时间和人口变化得出结论。未来的研究应描述和呈现分子和分母人群的基本特征,如人数、年龄和性别,并使用轻微截肢的标准定义,即踝关节或踝关节以下的截肢。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Foot
Foot Health Professions-Podiatry
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: The Foot is an international peer-reviewed journal covering all aspects of scientific approaches and medical and surgical treatment of the foot. The Foot aims to provide a multidisciplinary platform for all specialties involved in treating disorders of the foot. At present it is the only journal which provides this inter-disciplinary opportunity. Primary research papers cover a wide range of disorders of the foot and their treatment, including diabetes, vascular disease, neurological, dermatological and infectious conditions, sports injuries, biomechanics, bioengineering, orthoses and prostheses.
期刊最新文献
The effectiveness of custom hard-shell 3D-printed foot orthoses in a cohort of patients who did not respond to treatment with custom ethylene-vinyl-acetate (EVA) foot orthoses Regional changes in the free Achilles tendon volume in response to repeated submaximal contractions Mechanical drivers of intrinsic foot muscle for maximum toe flexor strength in upright standing across different body size Accuracy and reliability of the Ipswich touch test in identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients Predictors of poor pre-operative patient reported outcome measures in elective foot and ankle surgery: Analysis of 1217 patients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1