» Articles » PMID: 18299441

Use of the SINBAD Classification System and Score in Comparing Outcome of Foot Ulcer Management on Three Continents

Overview
Journal Diabetes Care
Specialty Endocrinology
Date 2008 Feb 27
PMID 18299441
Citations 52
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To compare populations with and outcomes of diabetic foot ulcers managed in the U.K., Germany, Tanzania, and Pakistan and to explore the use of a new score of ulcer type in comparing outcomes among different countries.

Research Design And Methods: Data from a series of 449 patients with diabetic foot ulcers managed in the U.K. were used to evaluate the new simplified system of classification and to derive an aggregate score. The use of the score was then explored using data from series managed in Germany (n = 239), Tanzania (n = 479), and Pakistan (n = 173).

Results: A highly significant difference was found in time to healing between ulcers of increasing score in the U.K. series (Kruskal-Wallis test; P = 0). When data from all centers were examined, a step-up in days to healing was noted for those with scores of >or=3 (out of 6). Examination of baseline variables contributing to outcome revealed the following differences among centers: ischemia, ulcer area, and depth contributing to outcome in the U.K.; ischemia, area, depth, and infection in Germany; depth, infection, and neuropathy in Tanzania; and depth alone in Pakistan.

Conclusions: Any system of classification designed for general implementation must encompass all the variables that contribute to outcome in different communities. Adoption of a simple score based on these variables, the Site, Ischemia, Neuropathy, Bacterial Infection, and Depth (SINBAD) score, may prove useful in predicting ulcer outcome and enabling comparison among different centers.

Citing Articles

Prevalence and predictors of infected diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) and DFU-related osteomyelitis amongst industrial workers wearing occupational safety footwear.

Mondal S, Lodh M, Sahoo S, Paul K, Biswas D, Krishna C Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):2576.

PMID: 39833236 PMC: 11747343. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-86013-y.


Emerging technologies for the management of diabetic foot ulceration: a review.

Sidhu A, Harbuzova V Front Clin Diabetes Healthc. 2024; 5:1440209.

PMID: 39600625 PMC: 11588682. DOI: 10.3389/fcdhc.2024.1440209.


Amputation versus circular external fixation in the treatment of diabetic foot with osteomyelitis: a cost and quality-of-life analysis.

Lopez Capdevilla L, Santamaria Fumas A, Sales Perez J, Dominguez Sevilla A, Del Corral Cuervo J, Varela-Quintana C Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 2024; 15:20420188241271795.

PMID: 39483172 PMC: 11526285. DOI: 10.1177/20420188241271795.


Mortality rates in people presenting with a new diabetes-related foot ulcer: a cohort study with implications for management.

Holman N, Yelland A, Young B, Valabhji J, Jeffcoate W, Game F Diabetologia. 2024; 67(12):2691-2701.

PMID: 39331060 PMC: 11604764. DOI: 10.1007/s00125-024-06262-w.


The promising approach of 3D bioprinting for diabetic foot ulcer treatment: A concise review of recent developments.

Biondo M, Tomasello L, Giordano C, Arnaldi G, Pizzolanti G Heliyon. 2024; 10(17):e36707.

PMID: 39281506 PMC: 11395744. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36707.