Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 article

Integrating clinical data into evidence-based practice: institutional guideline development for diabetic foot infections

1Citations signalées — pas une note de qualité
4Institutions déclarées
3Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Résumé fourni par la source

Background/objectives Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are a major cause of morbidity in low- and middle-income countries such as Pakistan, where antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and the absence of localized guidelines complicate their management. This study aimed to analyze the microbiological profile of DFIs and develop evidence-based, context-specific empirical treatment recommendations. Methods We conducted a retrospective study at a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan, reviewing all diabetic foot related admissions between January 2022 and December 2023. Patients with clinically suspected infections had wound cultures taken and were classified by infection severity using IDSA/IWGDF criteria. Wound specimens from 400 DFI patients were subjected to culture and CLSI-standard antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Pathogen patterns were analyzed across severity groups. A multidisciplinary stewardship team used these findings, together with international guidelines, to develop severity-specific institutional-based empiric treatment recommendations. Results A total of 118 culture-positive samples from 400 admissions were analyzed. Gram-negative organisms predominated (62%), followed by Escherichia coli (25%), Proteus mirabilis (14%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (10%). Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus ( MRSA) accounted for 23% and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus ( MSSA) 10%. E. coli was highly susceptible to tigecycline (86%) and amikacin (83%), while Proteus mirabilis was highly susceptible to carbapenems and piperacillin–tazobactam. MRSA/MSSA remain universally susceptible to vancomycin and linezolid. Based on these patterns, severity-stratified empiric regimens were recommended. Evidence grading supported strong recommendations for moderate to severe infections (SoR: Strong; QoE: Moderate). Conclusion This study highlights the limited role of Access antibiotics in DFIs, with Watch agents serving as the main empiric therapy and Reserve drugs reserved for multidrug-resistant cases. Using hospital antibiograms, international standards, and expert consensus, we developed a locally tailored institutional guideline for DFI management, which is expected to enhance patient care and antimicrobial stewardship, with periodic updates required as resistance evolves.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Integrating clinical data into evidence-based practice: institutional guideline development for diabetic foot infections
Date Crossref
09/02/2026
Éditeur
Frontiers Media SA
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Sujets associés

Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementOrthopedic Infections and TreatmentsWound Healing and Treatments

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Recherche à la demande dans Crossref et Europe PMC, sans clé ; OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant requis, aucune réponse conservée. Sources et limites.