Journal of Diabetes Investigation (Aug 2024)
What characteristics are most important in stratifying patients into groups with different risk of diabetic foot ulceration?
Abstract
Abstract Aims/Introduction This study aimed to assess if patients can be divided into different strata, and to explore if these correspond to the risk of diabetic foot complications. Materials and Methods A set of 28 demographic, vascular, neurological and biomechanical measures from 2,284 (1,310 men, 974 women) patients were included in this study. A two‐step cluster analysis technique was utilised to divide the patients into groups, each with similar characteristics. Results Only two distinct groups: group 1 (n = 1,199; 669 men, 530 women) and group 2 (n = 1,072; 636 men, 436 women) were identified. From continuous variables, the most important predictors of grouping were: ankle vibration perception threshold (16.9 ± 4.1 V vs 31.9 ± 7.4 V); hallux vibration perception threshold (16.1 ± 4.7 V vs 33.1 ± 7.9 V); knee vibration perception threshold (18.2 ± 5.1 V vs 30.1 ± 6.5 V); average temperature sensation threshold to cold (29.2 ± 1.1°C vs 26.7 ± 0.7°C) and hot (35.4 ± 1.8°C vs 39.5 ± 1.0°C) stimuli, and average temperature tolerance threshold to hot stimuli at the foot (43.4 ± 0.9°C vs 46.6 ± 1.3°C). From categorical variables, only impaired sensation to touch was found to have importance at the highest levels: 87.4% of those with normal sensation were in group 1; whereas group 2 comprised 95.1%, 99.3% and 90.5% of those with decreased, highly‐decreased and absent sensation to touch, respectively. In addition, neuropathy (monofilament) was a moderately important predictor (importance level 0.52) of grouping with 26.2% of participants with neuropathy in group 1 versus 73.5% of participants with neuropathy in group 2. Ulceration during follow up was almost fivefold higher in group 2 versus group 1. Conclusions Impaired sensations to temperature, vibration and touch were shown to be the strongest factors in stratifying patients into two groups with one group having almost 5‐fold risk of future foot ulceration compared to the other.
Keywords