Use of the SINBAD score as a predicting tool for major adverse foot events in patients with diabetic foot ulcer: A French multicentre study
- PMID: 37525456
- DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3705
Use of the SINBAD score as a predicting tool for major adverse foot events in patients with diabetic foot ulcer: A French multicentre study
Abstract
Objective: To assess the relationship between the site, ischaemia, neuropathy, bacterial infection, area, depth (SINBAD) score and major adverse foot events in patients with diabetes and foot ulcers.
Methods: For this retrospective ancillary study, patients (n = 537) followed for a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) in six French hospitals were included between 1 February 2019 and 17 March 2019, and between 1 February 2020 and 17 March 2020. The SINBAD score was assessed at inclusion. The frequency of a composite outcome consisting of eight major adverse foot events (MAFE) was assessed after 5-6 months of follow-up: hospitalisation for DFU, septic surgery, revascularisation, minor amputation, major amputation, death, secondary infection and ulcer recurrence. A logistical regression explored the link between the SINBAD score and MAFE and each of its component.
Results: A low SINBAD score (from 0 to 3) was observed in 61% of patients and a high (from 4 to 6) in 39%. MAFE occurred in, respectively, 24% and 28% of these patients. Multivariate analyses showed a significant relationship between the SINBAD score and MAFE, with the continuous SINBAD score: odds ratio (OR) 1.72 [95% CI (1.51-1.97)] or dichotomic SINBAD score (values: 0-3 and 4-6): OR 3.71 [95% CI (2.54-5.42)]. The SINBAD score (continuous or dichotomic) at inclusion was also significantly associated with six out of the eight components of the MAFE.
Conclusions: The SINBAD score is a useful tool for predicting major adverse foot events.
Keywords: SINBAD; diabetic foot ulcer; major adverse foot event.
© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
REFERENCES
-
- DavidArmstrong GDG, Swerdlow MA, Armstrong AA, Conte MS, Padula WV, Bus SA. Five year mortality and direct costs of care for people with diabetic foot complications are comparable to cancer. J Foot Ankle Res. 2020;13:1-4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13047-020-00383-2
-
- Wukich DK, Armstrong DG, Attinger CE, et al. Inpatient management of diabetic foot disorders: a clinical guide. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(9):2862-2871. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc12-2712
-
- Edmonds ME, Blundell MP, Morris ME, Cotton LT, Watkins PI. Improved survival of the diabetic foot: the role of the specialized foot clinic. Q J Med. 1986;60:763-771.
-
- Fusilli D, Alviggi L, seghieri G, de Bellis A. Improvement of diabetic foot care after the implementation of the International Consensus on the Diabetic Foot (ICDF): result of 5-year prospective study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2005;75:153-158.
-
- Krishnan S, Nash F, Baker N, Fowler D, Rayman G. Reduction in diabetic amputations over 11 year in a defined UK population: benefits of multidisciplinary team work and continuous prospective audit. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(1):99-101. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc07-1178
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
