A Systematic Review of the Impact of Foot Care Education on Self Efficacy and Self Care in Patients With Diabetes

ObjectiveThis review aims to assess the evidence supporting the impact of patient foot care education on self efficacy, self care behaviour, and self care knowledge in individuals with diabetes.MethodsThis systematic review was registered prospectively on the PROSPERO database (CRD42019106171). Ovid EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched from 1946 to the end of March 2019, using search terms related to the domains diabetic foot, patient education, self efficacy, self care behaviour, and self care knowledge. All included studies were prospective, randomised controlled trials that assessed foot care education interventions in individuals with diabetes and recorded an outcome related to self efficacy, self care behaviour, and/or self care knowledge.ResultsThirteen randomised controlled trials were included, reporting on a total of 3948 individuals. The risk of bias was high or unclear in 11 of the 13 included studies, and low in two studies. Both the education interventions delivered, and the outcome assessment tools used were heterogenous across included studies: meta-analysis was therefore not performed. Eight of 11 studies identified significantly better foot self care behaviour scores in individuals randomised to education compared with controls. Self efficacy scores were significantly better in education groups in four of five studies reporting this primary outcome. Foot care knowledge was significantly better in intervention vs. control in three of seven studies. In general, studies assessing secondary endpoints including quality of life and ulcer/amputation incidence tended not to identify significant clinical improvements.ConclusionThe available evidence is of inadequate quality to reliably conclude that foot care education has a positive impact on foot self care behaviour and self efficacy in individuals with diabetes. Quality data supporting accompanying benefits on quality of life or ulcer/amputation incidence are also lacking and should be considered as an important outcome measure in future studies. This review aims to assess the evidence supporting the impact of patient foot care education on self efficacy, self care behaviour, and self care knowledge in individuals with diabetes. This systematic review was registered prospectively on the PROSPERO database (CRD42019106171). Ovid EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched from 1946 to the end of March 2019, using search terms related to the domains diabetic foot, patient education, self efficacy, self care behaviour, and self care knowledge. All included studies were prospective, randomised controlled trials that assessed foot care education interventions in individuals with diabetes and recorded an outcome related to self efficacy, self care behaviour, and/or self care knowledge. Thirteen randomised controlled trials were included, reporting on a total of 3948 individuals. The risk of bias was high or unclear in 11 of the 13 included studies, and low in two studies. Both the education interventions delivered, and the outcome assessment tools used were heterogenous across included studies: meta-analysis was therefore not performed. Eight of 11 studies identified significantly better foot self care behaviour scores in individuals randomised to education compared with controls. Self efficacy scores were significantly better in education groups in four of five studies reporting this primary outcome. Foot care knowledge was significantly better in intervention vs. control in three of seven studies. In general, studies assessing secondary endpoints including quality of life and ulcer/amputation incidence tended not to identify significant clinical improvements. The available evidence is of inadequate quality to reliably conclude that foot care education has a positive impact on foot self care behaviour and self efficacy in individuals with diabetes. Quality data supporting accompanying benefits on quality of life or ulcer/amputation incidence are also lacking and should be considered as an important outcome measure in future studies.