Predictive factors for foot ulceration in diabetes:a follow-up

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Predictive factors for foot ulceration in diabetes: a follow-up.

  • IRAS ID

    97542

  • Contact name

    Fay Crawford

  • Contact email

    fay.crawford@nhs.net

  • Sponsor organisation

    NHS Fife

  • Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

    NHS REC approval reference (original), 04/S1401/197; NHS R&D ref ID (original), 2004DM04

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 11 months, 28 days

  • Research summary

    Our overarching research objectives are to produce an evidence clinical pathway by;
    I.Creating and validating a clinical prediction rule to assess the risk of a foot ulcer for people with diabetes
    II.Estimating the optimal monitoring time for risk assessments by following up patients outcomes for those who previously consented to participate in an NHS Tayside cohort study. It is this part of our research that is the focus of this ethics application
    III. Performing an overview of systematic reviews to identify effective preventative interventions
    IV.Combining the evidence from i, ii and iii in a cost effectiveness decision model framework and analyse alternative clinical and cost effective regimens at different monitoring frequencies
    V. Conduct a value of information analysis.
    We will use Individual Patient Data (IPD) collected from patients with diabetes from studies conducted worldwide (acronym PODUS) to develop a clinical prediction rule by producing a simple scoring system for use in clinical practice using these data.
    Monitoring intervals will also be calculated by our team using a sub set of the PODUS data and in consultation with clinical colleagues. We wish to collect long term follow-up data from patients who previously consented to their medical and health records being monitored in a cohort study conducted in NHS Tayside. It is this element of the research which requires the attention of the ethics committee.
    We will also conduct a review of preventative interventions, then the CPR and the data-driven monitoring intervals will comprise the evidence-based clinical pathway.
    We then propose to construct a decision analytic economic model incorporating our evidence based pathway and conduct cost effectiveness analyses comparing it with the current recommended pathways in the NICE and SIGN diabetes clinical guidelines.

  • REC name

    Scotland A: Adults with Incapacity only

  • REC reference

    16/SS/0213

  • Date of REC Opinion

    20 Dec 2016

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion