The effect of transitional care on the prevention of diabetic foot ulcers in patients at high risk for diabetic foot

  • Jianping LiuEmail author
  • Tiangui Chen
  • Shuo Wang
  • Huanning LiuEmail author
Original Article



To study the effect of transitional care on the prevention of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) in patients at high risk for diabetic foot.


A total of 284 diabetic patients at high risk for DFU were randomly divided into case and control groups (142 cases in each group). The control group was provided with conventional care in hospital. The case group received the transitional care intervention, including individualized education about diabetes mellitus and DFU, instruction in foot care, and the assistant management of calluses and the evaluation on quality of life. Both groups were followed up for 2 years. The levels of blood glucose, blood pressure and serum lipids, and foot dorsal artery pulse, 10-g monofilament nylon fiber probe test, knowledge of foot care, and diabetes quality of life (DQOL) in two groups were compared before and after transitional care intervention.


There were statistically significant improvements in the case group compared with the control group in plasma glucose and blood pressure levels, and in foot dorsal artery pulse, 10-g monofilament nylon fiber probe test, knowledge of foot care, and DQOL. The incidence of DFU was lower, and the ulcers also were milder in the case group than in the control group.


Transitional care was beneficial to the prevention of DFU and could reduce the development of DFU and improve the patients’ quality of life.


Transitional care Diabetes mellitus Diabetic foot ulcer 



The authors would like to thank the patients enrolled in the study and all doctors and nurses at the Department of Orthopedics, Beijing Shijitan Hospital.

Compliance with ethical standards

The study was approved by the ethics committee of Beijing Shijitan Hospital, and all patients provided written informed consent.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    World Health Organization. Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus (WHO/NCD/NCS/99.2). Geneva: World Health Organization; 1999.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    International diabetes federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas Eighth edition 2017 update. International Diabetes Federation; 2017.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1047–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xu Y, Wang L, He J, Bi Y, Li M, Wang T, et al. Prevalence and control of diabetes in Chinese adults. JAMA. 2013;310:948–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maderal AD, Vivas AC, Zwick TG, Kirsner RS. Diabetic foot ulcers: evaluation and management. Hosp Pract (Minneap). 2012;40:102–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Desalu OO, Salawu FK, Jimoh AK, Adekoya AO, Busari OA, Olokoba AB. Diabetic foot care: self reported knowledge and practice among patients attending three tertiary hospital in Nigeria. Ghana Med J. 2011;45:60–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barshes NR, Sigireddi M, Wrobel JS, et al. The system of care for the diabetic foot: objectives, outcomes, and opportunities. Diabet Foot Ankle. 2013;10:4.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li CL, Wang AH, Hu CW, et al. Investigation on hospitalization expenses of diabetic foot [in Chinese]. Chin J Diabetes. 2017;25:339–43.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zou XH, Li BH, Zhang J, et al. Analysis of healing time and hospitalization expense in diabetic foot ulcer patients with different TEXAS university grades [in Chinese]. Chin J Inj Rep Wound Healing (Electron Ed). 2018;13:50–3.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bahador RS, Afrazandeh SS, Ghanbarzehi N, Ebrahimi M. The impact of three-month training programme on foot care and self-efficacy of patients with diabetic foot ulcers. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11:IC01–4.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bakker K, Apelqvist J, Schaper NC, on behalf of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot Editorial Board. Practical guidelines on the management and prevention of the diabetic foot 2011. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2012;28:225–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ren M, Yang C, Lin DZ, Xiao HS, Mai LF, Guo YC, et al. Effect of intensive nursing education on the prevention of diabetic foot ulceration among patients with high-risk diabetic foot: a follow-up analysis. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014;16(9):576–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wagner FW Jr. The dysvascular foot: a system of diagnosis and treatment. Foot Ankle. 1981;2:64–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jacobson AM, Barofsky I, Cleary P, Rand LL. Reliability and validity of a diabetes quality-of-life measure for the diabetes control and complications trial (DCCT). Diabet Care. 1988;11:725–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Singh N, Armstrong DG, Lipsky BA. Preventing foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. JAMA. 2005;293:217–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hunt DL. Diabetes: foot ulcers and amputations. BMJ Clin Evid. 2011;2011:0602.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Enderlin CA, McLeskey N, Rooker JL, Steinhauser C, D'Avolio D, Gusewelle R, et al. Review of current conceptual models and frameworks to guide transitions of care in older adults. Geriatr Nurs. 2013;34:47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Adili F, Higgins I, Koch T. Older women and chronic illness: transitioning and learning to live with diabetes. Action Res. 2013;11:142–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Naylor M, Keating SA. Transitional care: moving patients from one care setting to another. Am J Nurs. 2008;108:58–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on the Care of Older Adults with Multimorbidity. Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: an approach for clinicians. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012;60:E1–E25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chin YF, Huang TT, Hsu BR. Impact of action cues, self-efficacy and perceived barriers on daily foot exam practice in Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with peripheral neuropathy. J Clin Nurs. 2013;22(1–2):61–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jin X, Liu GG, Gerstein HC, Levine MAH, Steeves K, Guan H, et al. Item reduction and validation of the Chinese version of diabetes quality-of-life measure (DQOL). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16:78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rubin RR, Peyrot M. Quality of life and diabetes. Diabet Metab Res Rev. 1999;5:205–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ware JE Jr, Gandek B, Guyer R, et al. Standardizing disease-specific quality of life measures across multiple chronic conditions: development and initial evaluation of the QOL Disease Impact Scale (QDIS®). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14:84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    El Achhab Y, Nejjari C, Chikri M, et al. Disease-specific health-related quality of life instruments among adults diabetic: a systematic review. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2008;80:171–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Beckert S, Witte M, Wicke C, Konigsrainer A, Coerper S. A new wound-based severity score for diabetic foot ulcers: a prospective analysis of 1,000 patients. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:988–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Oyibo SO, Jude EB, Tarawneh I, Nguyen HC, Armstrong DG, Harkless LB, et al. The effects of ulcer size and site, patient’s age, sex and type and duration of diabetes on the outcome of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabet Med. 2001;18:133–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Frykberg RG. An evidence-based approach to diabetic foot infections. Am J Surg. 2003;186:44S–54S discussion 61S–64S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Frykberg RG, Lavery LA, Pham H, Harvey C, Harkless L, Veves A. Role of neuropathy and high foot pressures in diabetic foot ulceration. Diabetes Care. 1998;21:1714–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Beckman JA, Creager MA, Libby P. Diabetes and atherosclerosis: epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management. JAMA. 2002;287:2570–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet. 1998;352:837–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Research Society for Study of Diabetes in India 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopedics, Center of Diabetic Foot, Beijing Shijitan HospitalCapital Medical UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations