Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) as a new adjuvant therapy has shown a potential capability to promote diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) healing. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ESWT on the healing of DFUs. The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China Biology Medicine and reference lists were searched for studies published up to December 2018. Randomized controlled trials of any design, including ESWT for patients with DFU, were included. Two reviewers extracted data, including the wound surface area (WSA), percentage of re-epithelialization, population of complete cure and unchanged and other related outcomes. Eight randomized controlled trials (N=339) were included. ESWT was found to be associated with a greater reduction of WSA by 1.54 cm2, and increase of re-epithelialization by 26.31%. A greater population with complete cure was found at the end of treatment (risk ratio [RR] = 2.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.46 to 3.40); however, there was no statistically significant difference at the end of follow up (p=0.052). It can also reduce treatment inefficiency by 4.8-fold (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.37). In addition, ESWT also showed a higher superiority than hyperbaric oxygen therapy in the population for complete cure and unchanged ulcer (RR=1.83; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.94 and RR=0.25; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.48, respectively). ESWT is a feasible adjuvant treatment for DFUs. It can effectively improve the complete cure rate, shorten the healing period of DFUs and significantly reduce treatment ineffectiveness. This can provide new therapeutic ideas for clinical practice of intractable and recurrent DFUs.

OBJECTIVES: To review the use of telehealth in subjects with diabetic foot ulcer; evaluating its clinical outcomes, diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness and behavioural perceptions. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: Selected studies were conducted in Australia, USA, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland and UK. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 948 identified studies were evaluated against the inclusion criteria. Eleven eligible studies were included for review. Patients with diabetic foot ulcer had to have telehealth guided management. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Telehealth systems were evaluated against at least one of the following: clinical implications on ulcer healing and disease prognosis; diagnostic accuracy; cost-effectiveness; behavioural perceptions among health professionals or patients. RESULT: Eleven eligible studies were included for review. Studies that evaluated telehealth against clinical outcomes were underpowered by study design, sample sizes and short duration follow-up. Telehealth systems demonstrated good intra- and inter-observer reproducibility, high diagnostic accuracy and agreement with live assessments. Authors rationalised the cost-effectiveness of their respective telehealth systems, but could not support this with long-term cost analysis. Both patient and health professionals responded positively towards telehealth in surveys and face-to-face interviews. CONCLUSION: Telehealth yields high diagnostic accuracy, reproducibility and positive behavioural perceptions. However, it is not clear if telehealth use in diabetic foot management has favourable clinical and economic outcomes. More long-term prospective controlled trials on larger populations are needed to further characterise our findings