In 2019, the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) reported
\nthat over 77 million individuals have diabetes in India, which
\nwill increase to over 100 million by 2030 (IDF, 2019). Of these
\npeople with diabetes, 25% will develop a diabetic foot ulcer
\n(DFU), equating to 5 million by 2030. Overall, half of ulcers
\nbecome infected during the healing process, necessitating
\nhospitalisation, while 20% of these patients require amputation.
\nDFUs contribute to approximately 80% of all non-traumatic
\namputations performed annually in India (Ghosh and Valia,
\n2017). It is indicated that social epidemiology regarding DFU in
\nIndia differs from the West due to many factors including socio economic and cultural factors. This can lead to significant delay
\nin specialist referral, with patients still relying on treatment based
\non local ethnic methods and not based on scientific data. This
\nresults in patients presenting with highly infected ulcers (Rastogi
\nand Bhansali, 2016).
\nInfections in wound management are closely associated with
\ndelayed healing, increased complications such as amputation,
\nand, moreover, have a negative impact on patients\u2019 quality of life
\n(Cutting, 2016; Armstrong et al, 2017). Furthermore, due to the
\ncomplications that ensue, infections can increase the economic
\nburden on healthcare facilities related to wound management
\nand increase hospital stay (Nussbaum et al, 2018). The overall
\nmanagement plan for people with DFUs (and for that matter any
\nchronic wound) should include six spheres: mechanical control
\nor pressure offloading, medical\/metabolic control of the diabetes
\nand comorbidities, microbiological\/infection management,
\nvascular control ensuring adequate blood flow, wound control
\nand education aimed at increasing patient awareness of foot care
\nover their lifetime.
\nManagement of wound infection needs to include understanding
\nand involvement of the patient\u2019s response and the local wound
\nhealing environment, as well as a reduction of the microbial load
\nas part of the standard of care. This will include wound cleansing,
\ndebridement, and appropriate use of topical antimicrobials
\n(International Wound Infection Institute, 2016).
\nThe use of technology lipido-colloid with silver (TLC-Ag) is
\nsupported by high-quality clinical evidence in the management of
\nwounds at risk or presenting with clinical signs of local infection;
\nTLC-Ag dressings show superior efficacy in reducing wound
\nbioburden, while also promoting wound healing. Additionally,
\nresults demonstrate high tolerance and acceptability of TLC-Ag
\ndressings because of their atraumatic properties (Lazareth et al,
\n2007; 2008; Sch\u00e4fer et al, 2008; Lazareth et al, 2012; Allaert,
\n2014). TLC-Ag dressings with cohesive poly-absorbent fibres
\n(UrgoClean Ag) have been developed to manage wounds with
\nhigher levels of exudate and trap sloughy residues and can be
\nused throughout the stages of wound healing (Meaume et al,
\n2012; 2014; Dissemond al, 2020).
\nThis document showcases the outcomes of UrgoClean Ag
\nin a real-world environment, demonstrating enhancement in
\nthe management of DFU in India with improvement in wound
\nconditions and, furthermore, enhancing the patients\u2019 quality
\nof life and clinicians\u2019 satisfaction. Clinicians and organisations
\nworldwide need to understand that appropriate wound
\nmanagement interventions based on high-level evidence should
\nbe used to formulate local guidelines and DFU care pathways<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":7193,"template":"","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"no","_lmt_disable":""},"down-file-type":[213],"file-tags":[233],"class_list":["post-5817","download-manage","type-download-manage","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","down-file-type-urgoclean-ag","file-tags-publications"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n