Diabetic foot physical examination

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Diabetic foot Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Classification

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Diabetic foot from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Screening

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Diagnosis

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Electrocardiogram

X Ray

CT

MRI

Echocardiography or Ultrasound

Other Imaging Findings

Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Medical Therapy

Surgery

Primary Prevention

Secondary Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Case Studies

Case #1

Diabetic foot physical examination On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Diabetic foot physical examination

All Images
X-rays
Echo & Ultrasound
CT Images
MRI

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA on Diabetic foot physical examination

CDC on Diabetic foot physical examination

Diabetic foot physical examination in the news

Blogs on Diabetic foot physical examination

Directions to Hospitals Treating Diabetic foot

Risk calculators and risk factors for Diabetic foot physical examination

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1] Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Anahita Deylamsalehi, M.D.[2] Vishnu Vardhan Serla M.B.B.S. [3]


Overview

Patients with diabetic foot ulcer could appear ill if ulcers are severe or infected. In severe and chronic infected ulcers patients may have fever, tachycardia and low blood pressure. Neuromuscular examination of patients with diabetic foot is usually normal, except in their foot. Altered motor tone, reflexes and sensation is expected in these patients. Neuropathy symptoms score (NSS) and neuropathy disability score (NDS) are helpful in neuropathy assessment of patients with diabetic foot. Findings such as impaired vibration and pressure perception, position sense and thresholds for warm thermal perception favor the diagnosis of sensory neuropathy. It is critical to check the extremities for findings such as ulcers, peeling skin, dilated or varicose veins, shiny skin with reduced hair distribution and broken nail while examining diabetic foot. Moreover infection possibility should be evaluated. Findings such as pus, erythema, Warmth, induration and bad odor suggest the presence of infection. In some cases unroofing a small scar demonstrates a deeper infected abscesses. In the other word, evaluating an ulcer for infection must be done after debridement. Other necessary physical examinations in these patients are checking the capillary filling time, ankle brachial index, tactile and vibration sensation and pressure perception.

Physical Examination

Appearance of the Patient

Vital Signs

Skin

HEENT

Neck

Lungs

Heart

Abdomen

Back

Genitourinary

Neuromuscular

Neuropathy Assessment

The Ipswich Touch Test (IpTT) can diagnosis neuropathy[1][2]. The A clinical practice guideline by the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) recommended the (IpTT) as an alternative to the monofilament exam[3] Instructions for the IpTT are:

"lightly touch the tips of the first, third and fifth toes of each foot, for 1–2 s, with the tip of the index finger. They were not to push, prod, tap or poke, because this may elicit a sensation other than light touch. With their eyes closed, the patient was instructed to say yes whenever they felt the touch."[4]

The neuropathy symptoms score (NSS) and neuropathy disability score (NDS) are helpful in physical examination of patients with diabetic foot.[5][6][7]. Findings that favor the diagnosis of sensory neuropathy:[8][9]

Vascular

The Rational Clinical Examination group concluded[10]"

  • "The PAD screening score using the hand-held Doppler has the greatest diagnostic accuracy"
    • The Score is:
      • The number of auscultated components (right posterior tibial artery + left posterior tibial artery; range of 0 for none heard to 3 for normal for each artery)
        plus
      • The grade of palpated posterior tibial artery (right posterior tibial artery + left posterior tibial artery; 2 for normal, 1 for palpated but abnormal, 0 for not palpable for each artery)
        plus
      • A history of myocardial infarction (1 for none, 0 for prior myocardial infarction)
    • Interpretation: normal is 10 (combining both feet). A score < 6 increases risk of PAD.


The USPSTF stated[11]:

  • "The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for PAD and CVD risk with the ABI in asymptomatic adults. (I statement)."

Extremities

Inspection

The following list is a summary of possible findings in diabetic foot inspection:[7][12][13][14][15][16]

Palpation

The following is a list of recommended examinations in a diabetic foot patients:[7][9][17]

Video: Physical Examination Diabetes

{{#ev:youtube|715j6zRZHaA}}

Image: Diabetic Foot Ulcer

Diabetic foot ulcer
Diabetic foot ulcer


Staging of diabetic wounds

A systematic review identified better staging systems[18]:

  • University of Texas (UT) Score[19]

More recently, the International Working Group’s diabetic foot (IWGDF) risk classification [20].

International Working Group’s diabetic foot (IWGDF) risk classification [20]
Risk group Findings
Risk Group 0 No neuropathy
No peripheral arterial
No foot deformity or limited joint mobility
Risk Group 1 Peripheral neuropathy
No peripheral arterial
No foot deformity or limited joint mobility
Risk Group 2 Peripheral neuropathy and foot deformity or limited joint mobility
and/or peripheral arterial disease
Risk Group 3 History of ulcer or amputation or Charcot

The working group separately describes the UT classification of ulcers. This system includes "preulcerative" lesions:

  • "Grade 0 wounds are preulcerative areas or previous ulcer sites that are now completely epithelialized after debridement of hyperkeratosis and nonviable tissue. The diagnosis of a Grade 0 wound can be made only after removal of any regional hyperkeratosis, as quite often frank ulcerations may be hidden by overlying calluses"
  • The system adds whether the lesion is associated with infection or ischemia.

References

  1. Zhao N, Xu J, Zhou Q, Li X, Chen J, Zhou J; et al. (2021). "Application of the Ipswich Touch Test for diabetic peripheral neuropathy screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis". BMJ Open. 11 (10): e046966. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046966. PMC 8491285 Check |pmc= value (help). PMID 34607858 Check |pmid= value (help).
  2. Rayman G, Vas PR, Baker N, Taylor CG, Gooday C, Alder AI; et al. (2011). "The Ipswich Touch Test: a simple and novel method to identify inpatients with diabetes at risk of foot ulceration". Diabetes Care. 34 (7): 1517–8. doi:10.2337/dc11-0156. PMC 3120164. PMID 21593300.
  3. Bus SA, Lavery LA, Monteiro-Soares M, Rasmussen A, Raspovic A, Sacco ICN; et al. (2020). "Guidelines on the prevention of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update)". Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 36 Suppl 1: e3269. doi:10.1002/dmrr.3269. PMID 32176451 Check |pmid= value (help).
  4. Sharma S, Kerry C, Atkins H, Rayman G (2014). "The Ipswich Touch Test: a simple and novel method to screen patients with diabetes at home for increased risk of foot ulceration". Diabet Med. 31 (9): 1100–3. doi:10.1111/dme.12450. PMID 24673517. Review in: Ann Intern Med. 2015 Feb 17;162(4):JC10
  5. Meijer JW, Smit AJ, Sonderen EV, Groothoff JW, Eisma WH, Links TP (2002). "Symptom scoring systems to diagnose distal polyneuropathy in diabetes: the Diabetic Neuropathy Symptom score". Diabet Med. 19 (11): 962–5. PMID 12421436.
  6. Daousi C, MacFarlane IA, Woodward A, Nurmikko TJ, Bundred PE, Benbow SJ (2004). "Chronic painful peripheral neuropathy in an urban community: a controlled comparison of people with and without diabetes". Diabet Med. 21 (9): 976–82. doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2004.01271.x. PMID 15317601.
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 Lepäntalo M, Apelqvist J, Setacci C, Ricco JB, de Donato G, Becker F; et al. (2011). "Chapter V: Diabetic foot". Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 42 Suppl 2: S60–74. doi:10.1016/S1078-5884(11)60012-9. PMID 22172474.
  8. Armstrong DG, Lavery LA (1998). "Diabetic foot ulcers: prevention, diagnosis and classification". Am Fam Physician. 57 (6): 1325–32, 1337–8. PMID 9531915.
  9. 9.0 9.1 McNeely MJ, Boyko EJ, Ahroni JH, Stensel VL, Reiber GE, Smith DG; et al. (1995). "The independent contributions of diabetic neuropathy and vasculopathy in foot ulceration. How great are the risks?". Diabetes Care. 18 (2): 216–9. doi:10.2337/diacare.18.2.216. PMID 7729300.
  10. Khan NA, Rahim SA, Anand SS, Simel DL, Panju A (2006). "Does the clinical examination predict lower extremity peripheral arterial disease?". JAMA. 295 (5): 536–46. doi:10.1001/jama.295.5.536. PMID 16449619.
  11. US Preventive Services Task Force. Curry SJ, Krist AH, Owens DK, Barry MJ, Caughey AB; et al. (2018). "Screening for Peripheral Artery Disease and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment With the Ankle-Brachial Index: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement". JAMA. 320 (2): 177–183. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.8357. PMID 29998344.
  12. Wagner, F William (1987). "The Diabetic Foot". Orthopedics. 10 (1): 163–172. doi:10.3928/0147-7447-19870101-28. ISSN 0147-7447.
  13. Kalish, Jeffrey; Hamdan, Allen (2010). "Management of diabetic foot problems". Journal of Vascular Surgery. 51 (2): 476–486. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2009.08.043. ISSN 0741-5214.
  14. Caputo GM, Cavanagh PR, Ulbrecht JS, Gibbons GW, Karchmer AW (1994). "Assessment and management of foot disease in patients with diabetes". N Engl J Med. 331 (13): 854–60. doi:10.1056/NEJM199409293311307. PMID 7848417.
  15. Wukich DK, Armstrong DG, Attinger CE, Boulton AJ, Burns PR, Frykberg RG; et al. (2013). "Inpatient management of diabetic foot disorders: a clinical guide". Diabetes Care. 36 (9): 2862–71. doi:10.2337/dc12-2712. PMC 3747877. PMID 23970716.
  16. Lipsky BA, Berendt AR, Cornia PB, Pile JC, Peters EJ, Armstrong DG; et al. (2012). "2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections". Clin Infect Dis. 54 (12): e132–73. doi:10.1093/cid/cis346. PMID 22619242.
  17. Grayson ML, Gibbons GW, Balogh K, Levin E, Karchmer AW (1995). "Probing to bone in infected pedal ulcers. A clinical sign of underlying osteomyelitis in diabetic patients". JAMA. 273 (9): 721–3. PMID 7853630.
  18. Karthikesalingam A, Holt PJ, Moxey P, Jones KG, Thompson MM, Hinchliffe RJ (2010). "A systematic review of scoring systems for diabetic foot ulcers". Diabet Med. 27 (5): 544–9. doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.02989.x. PMID 20536950.
  19. Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Harkless LB (1996). "Classification of diabetic foot wounds". J Foot Ankle Surg. 35 (6): 528–31. doi:10.1016/s1067-2516(96)80125-6. PMID 8986890.
  20. 20.0 20.1 Lavery, Lawrence A.; Armstrong, David G. (2012). "Clinical Examination and Risk Classification of the Diabetic Foot". The Diabetic Foot (PDF). Humana Press. pp. 59–74. doi:10.1007/978-1-61779-791-0_4.


Template:WikiDoc Sources