10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      One‐stop microvascular screening service: an effective model for the early detection of diabetic peripheral neuropathy and the high‐risk foot

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims

          To evaluate the feasibility of a one‐stop microvascular screening service for the early diagnosis of diabetic distal symmetrical polyneuropathy, painful distal symmetrical polyneuropathy and the at‐risk diabetic foot.

          Methods

          People with diabetes attending retinal screening in hospital and community settings had their feet examined by a podiatrist. Assessment included: Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score evaluation; a 10‐g monofilament test; and two validated, objective and quick measures of neuropathy obtained using the point‐of‐care devices ‘ DPN‐Check’, a hand‐held device that measures sural nerve conduction velocity and amplitude, and ‘Sudoscan’, a device that measures sudomotor function. The diagnostic utility of these devices was assessed against the Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score as the ‘gold standard’.

          Results

          A total of 236 consecutive people attending the retinal screening service, 18.9% of whom had never previously had their feet examined, were evaluated. The prevalence of distal symmetrical polyneuropathy, assessed using the Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score, was 30.9%, and was underestimated by 10‐g monofilament test (14.4%). The prevalence of distal symmetrical polyneuropathy using DPN‐check was 51.5% (84.3% sensitivity, 68.3% specificity), 38.2% using Sudoscan foot electrochemical skin conductance (77.4% sensitivity, 68.3% specificity), and 61.9% using abnormality in either of the results (93.2% sensitivity, 52.8% specificity). The results of both devices correlated with Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score ( P<0.001). A new diagnosis of painful distal symmetrical polyneuropathy was made in 59 participants (25%), and 56.6% had moderate‐ or high‐risk foot. Participants rated the service very highly.

          Conclusions

          Combined, eye, foot and renal screening is feasible, has a high uptake, reduces clinic visits, and identifies painful distal symmetrical polyneuropathy and the at‐risk foot. Combined large‐ and small‐nerve‐fibre assessment using non‐invasive, quantitative and quick point‐of‐care devices may be an effective model for the early diagnosis of distal symmetrical polyneuropathy.

          What's new?

          • A novel, one‐stop microvascular screening service in a hospital and community setting was initiated, whereby people with diabetes attending the annual eye screening, which has a high uptake, also underwent foot assessment aimed at detecting early peripheral neuropathy and the at‐risk foot requiring referral to the Foot Protection Team. Foot examination was carried out by a podiatrist. The service also identified previously undiagnosed painful neuropathy and had a high patient acceptability level.

          • The service used novel, validated point‐of‐care devices for combined large‐ and small‐nerve‐fibre assessment, with the aim of diagnosing peripheral neuropathy early.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

          A representation and interpretation of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve obtained by the "rating" method, or by mathematical predictions based on patient characteristics, is presented. It is shown that in such a setting the area represents the probability that a randomly chosen diseased subject is (correctly) rated or ranked with greater suspicion than a randomly chosen non-diseased subject. Moreover, this probability of a correct ranking is the same quantity that is estimated by the already well-studied nonparametric Wilcoxon statistic. These two relationships are exploited to (a) provide rapid closed-form expressions for the approximate magnitude of the sampling variability, i.e., standard error that one uses to accompany the area under a smoothed ROC curve, (b) guide in determining the size of the sample required to provide a sufficiently reliable estimate of this area, and (c) determine how large sample sizes should be to ensure that one can statistically detect differences in the accuracy of diagnostic techniques.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The prevalence by staged severity of various types of diabetic neuropathy, retinopathy, and nephropathy in a population-based cohort: the Rochester Diabetic Neuropathy Study.

            The magnitude of the health problem from diabetic neuropathies remains inadequately estimated due to the lack of prospective population-based studies employing standardized and validated assessments of the type and stage of neuropathy as compared with background frequency. All Rochester, Minnesota, residents with diabetes mellitus on January 1, 1986, were invited to participate in a cross-sectional and longitudinal study of diabetic neuropathies (and also of other microvascular and macrovascular complications). Of 64,573 inhabitants on January 1, 1986 in Rochester, 870 (1.3%) had clinically recognized diabetes mellitus (National Diabetes Data Group criteria), of whom 380 were enrolled in the Rochester Diabetic Neuropathy Study. Of these, 102 (26.8%) had insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM), and 278 (73.2%) had non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). Approximately 10% of diabetic patients had neurologic deficits attributable to nondiabetic causes. Sixty-six percent of IDDM patients had some form of neuropathy; the frequencies of individual types were as follows: polyneuropathy, 54%; carpal tunnel syndrome, asymptomatic, 22%, and symptomatic, 11%; visceral autonomic neuropathy, 7%, and other varieties, 3%. Among NIDDM patients, 59% had various neuropathies; the individual percentages were 45%, 29%, 6%, 5%, and 3%. Symptomatic degrees of polyneuropathy occurred in only 15% of IDDM and 13% of NIDDM patients. The more severe stage of polyneuropathy, to the point that patients were unable to walk on their heels and also had distal sensory and autonomic deficits (stage 2b) occurred even less frequently--6% of IDDM and 1% of NIDDM patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Signs and symptoms versus nerve conduction studies to diagnose diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy: Cl vs. NPhys trial.

              The purpose was to test whether physicians can validly and reproducibly diagnose diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSPN). Twelve physicians assessed 24 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) on consecutive days (576 examinations) with physical features and voice disguised. Results were compared to gold standard 75% group diagnosis (dx) and a nerve conduction score (Sigma5 NC nds). Masking of patients was achieved. Reproducibility measured by the kappa coefficient and compared to Sigma5 NC nd varied considerably among physicians: median and ranges: signs 0.8 (0.32-1.0); symptoms 0.79 (0.36-1.0), and diagnoses 0.47 (0.33-0.84), both low and high scores indicating poor performance. There was substantial agreement between 75% group dx and confirmed NC abnormality (abn). As compared to Sigma5 NC, individual physicians' clinical dx was excessively variable and frequently inaccurate. Study physician dx from signs and symptoms were excessively variable, often overestimating DSPN. Specific approaches to improving clinical proficiency should be tested.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                solomon.tesfaye@sth.nhs.uk
                Journal
                Diabet Med
                Diabet. Med
                10.1111/(ISSN)1464-5491
                DME
                Diabetic Medicine
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0742-3071
                1464-5491
                10 May 2018
                July 2018
                : 35
                : 7 ( doiID: 10.1111/dme.2018.35.issue-7 )
                : 887-894
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Podiatry Services Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Sheffield UK
                [ 2 ] Department of Diabetes Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Sheffield UK
                [ 3 ] Department of Oncology and Human Metabolism University of Sheffield Sheffield UK
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence to: Solomon Tesfaye. E‐mail: solomon.tesfaye@ 123456sth.nhs.uk .
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1190-1472
                Article
                DME13630
                10.1111/dme.13630
                6033008
                29608799
                4a600459-38e1-4b11-a6da-3b4375bd23cc
                © 2018 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

                History
                : 26 March 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 2, Pages: 8, Words: 6255
                Funding
                Funded by: Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
                Categories
                Research: Complications
                Research Articles
                Complications
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                dme13630
                July 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.4.3 mode:remove_FC converted:05.07.2018

                Endocrinology & Diabetes
                Endocrinology & Diabetes

                Comments

                Comment on this article