Effect of ramipril on walking times and quality of life among patients with peripheral artery disease and intermittent claudication : a randomized controlled trial

Importance Approximately one-third of patients with peripheral artery disease experience intermittent claudication, with consequent loss of quality of life. Objective To determine the efficacy of ramipril for improving walking ability, patient-perceived walking performance, and quality of life in patients with claudication. Design, Setting, and Patients Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted among 212 patients with peripheral artery disease (mean age, 65.5 [SD, 6.2] years), initiated in May 2008 and completed in August 2011 and conducted at 3 hospitals in Australia. Intervention Patients were randomized to receive 10 mg/d of ramipril (n = 106) or matching placebo (n = 106) for 24 weeks. Main Outcome Measures Maximum and pain-free walking times were recorded during a standard treadmill test. The Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) and Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) were used to assess walking ability and quality of life, respectively. Results At 6 months, relative to placebo, ramipril was associated with a 75-second (95% CI, 60-89 seconds) increase in mean pain-free walking time (P < .001) and a 255-second (95% CI, 215-295 seconds) increase in maximum walking time (P < .001). Relative to placebo, ramipril improved the WIQ median distance score by 13.8 (Hodges-Lehmann 95% CI, 12.2-15.5), speed score by 13.3 (95% CI, 11.9-15.2), and stair climbing score by 25.2 (95% CI, 25.1-29.4) (P < .001 for all). The overall SF-36 median Physical Component Summary score improved by 8.2 (Hodges-Lehmann 95% CI, 3.6-11.4; P = .02) in the ramipril group relative to placebo. Ramipril did not affect the overall SF-36 median Mental Component Summary score. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with intermittent claudication, 24-week treatment with ramipril resulted in significant increases in pain-free and maximum treadmill walking times compared with placebo. This was associated with a significant increase in the physical functioning component of the SF-36 score. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00681226

Queensland diabetic foot hospitalisations (2005-10) : in what state is our foot hospital problem?

Background Diabetes foot complications are a leading cause of overall avoidable hospital admissions. Since 2006, the Queensland Diabetes Clinical Network has implemented programs aimed at reducing diabetes-related hospitalisation. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to determine the incidence of diabetes foot-related hospital admissions in Queensland from 2005 to 2010. Methods Data on all primary diabetes foot-related admissions in Queensland from 2005-2010 was obtained using diabetes foot-related ICD-10-AM (hospital discharge) codes. Queensland diabetes foot-related admission incidences were calculated using general population data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Furthermore, diabetes foot-related sub-group admissions were analysed. Chi-squared tests were used to assess changes in admissions over time. Results Overall, 24,917 diabetes foot-related admissions occurred, resulting in the use of 260,085 bed days or 1.4% of all available Queensland hospital bed days (18,352,152). The primary reasons for these admissions were foot ulcers (49.8%), cellulitis (20.7%), peripheral vascular disease (17.8%) and osteomyelitis (3.8%). The diabetes foot-related admission incidence among the general population (per 100,000) reduced by 22% (103.0 in 2005, to 80.7 in 2010, p < 0.001); bed days decreased by 18% (1,099 to 904, p < 0.001). Conclusion Diabetes foot complications appear to be the primary reason for 1.4 out of every 100 hospital beds used in Queensland. There has been a significant reduction in the incidence of diabetes foot-related admissions in Queensland between 2005 and 2010. This decrease has coincided with a corresponding decrease in amputations and the implementation of several diabetes foot clinical programs throughout Queensland.

Noninvasive imaging of atheromatous carotid plaques

Atherothrombosis is a systemic disease of the arterial wall that affects the carotid, coronary, and peripheral vascular beds, and the aorta. This condition is associated with complications such as stroke, myocardial infarction, and peripheral vascular disease, which usually result from unstable atheromatous plaques. The study of atheromatous plaques can provide useful information about the natural history and progression of the disease, and aid in the selection of appropriate treatment. Plaque imaging can be crucial in achieving this goal. In this Review, we focus on the various noninvasive imaging techniques that are being used for morphological and functional assessment of carotid atheromatous plaques in the clinical setting.

Clinically-indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters

BACKGROUND: US Centers for Disease Control guidelines recommend replacement of peripheral intravenous (IV) catheters no more frequently than every 72 to 96 hours. Routine replacement is thought to reduce the risk of phlebitis and bloodstream infection. Catheter insertion is an unpleasant experience for patients and replacement may be unnecessary if the catheter remains functional and there are no signs of inflammation. Costs associated with routine replacement may be considerable. This is an update of a review first published in 2010. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of removing peripheral IV catheters when clinically indicated compared with removing and re-siting the catheter routinely. SEARCH METHODS: For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases (PVD) Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the PVD Specialised Register (December 2012) and CENTRAL (2012, Issue 11). We also searched MEDLINE (last searched October 2012) and clinical trials registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared routine removal of peripheral IV catheters with removal only when clinically indicated in hospitalised or community dwelling patients receiving continuous or intermittent infusions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials with a total of 4895 patients were included in the review. Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) was assessed in five trials (4806 patients). There was no significant between group difference in the CRBSI rate (clinically-indicated 1/2365; routine change 2/2441). The risk ratio (RR) was 0.61 but the confidence interval (CI) was wide, creating uncertainty around the estimate (95% CI 0.08 to 4.68; P = 0.64). No difference in phlebitis rates was found whether catheters were changed according to clinical indications or routinely (clinically-indicated 186/2365; 3-day change 166/2441; RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.39). This result was unaffected by whether infusion through the catheter was continuous or intermittent. We also analysed the data by number of device days and again no differences between groups were observed (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.27; P = 0.75). One trial assessed all-cause bloodstream infection. There was no difference in this outcome between the two groups (clinically-indicated 4/1593 (0.02%); routine change 9/1690 (0.05%); P = 0.21). Cannulation costs were lower by approximately AUD 7.00 in the clinically-indicated group (mean difference (MD) -6.96, 95% CI -9.05 to -4.86; P ≤ 0.00001). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review found no evidence to support changing catheters every 72 to 96 hours. Consequently, healthcare organisations may consider changing to a policy whereby catheters are changed only if clinically indicated. This would provide significant cost savings and would spare patients the unnecessary pain of routine re-sites in the absence of clinical indications. To minimise peripheral catheter-related complications, the insertion site should be inspected at each shift change and the catheter removed if signs of inflammation, infiltration, or blockage are present. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of removing peripheral IV catheters when clinically indicated compared with removing and re-siting the catheter routinely. SEARCH METHODS: For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases (PVD) Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the PVD Specialised Register (December 2012) and CENTRAL (2012, Issue 11). We also searched MEDLINE (last searched October 2012) and clinical trials registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared routine removal of peripheral IV catheters with removal only when clinically indicated in hospitalised or community dwelling patients receiving continuous or intermittent infusions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials with a total of 4895 patients were included in the review. Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) was assessed in five trials (4806 patients). There was no significant between group difference in the CRBSI rate (clinically-indicated 1/2365; routine change 2/2441). The risk ratio (RR) was 0.61 but the confidence interval (CI) was wide, creating uncertainty around the estimate (95% CI 0.08 to 4.68; P = 0.64). No difference in phlebitis rates was found whether catheters were changed according to clinical indications or routinely (clinically-indicated 186/2365; 3-day change 166/2441; RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.39). This result was unaffected by whether infusion through the catheter was continuous or intermittent. We also analysed the data by number of device days and again no differences between groups were observed (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.27; P = 0.75). One trial assessed all-cause bloodstream infection. There was no difference in this outcome between the two groups (clinically-indicated 4/1593 (0.02%); routine change 9/1690 (0.05%); P = 0.21). Cannulation costs were lower by approximately AUD 7.00 in the clinically-indicated group (mean difference (MD) -6.96, 95% CI -9.05 to -4.86; P ≤ 0.00001). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review found no evidence to support changing catheters every 72 to 96 hours. Consequently, healthcare organisations may consider changing to a policy whereby catheters are changed only if clinically indicated. This would provide significant cost savings and would spare patients the unnecessary pain of routine re-sites in the absence of clinical indications. To minimise peripheral catheter-related complications, the insertion site should be inspected at each shift change and the catheter removed if signs of inflammation, infiltration, or blockage are present.

The association of chronic kidney disease and dialysis treatment with foot ulceration and major amputation

Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 4-5 and dialysis treatment on incidence of foot ulceration and major lower extremity amputation in comparison to CKD stage 3. Methods In this retrospective study, all individuals who visited our hospital between 2006 and 2012 because of CKD stages 3 to 5 or dialysis treatment were included. Medical records were reviewed for incidence of foot ulceration and major amputation. The time from CKD 3, CKD 4-5, and dialysis treatment until first foot ulceration and first major lower extremity amputation was calculated and analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. Diabetes mellitus, peripheral arterial disease, peripheral neuropathy, and foot deformities were included for potential confounding. Results A total of 669 individuals were included: 539 in CKD 3, 540 in CKD 4-5, and 259 in dialysis treatment (individuals could progress from one group to the next). Unadjusted foot ulcer incidence rates per 1000 patients per year were 12 for CKD 3, 47 for CKD 4-5, and 104 for dialysis (P < .001). In multivariate analyses, the hazard ratio for incidence of foot ulceration was 4.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-6.3) in CKD 4-5 and 7.6 (95% CI, 4.8-12.1) in dialysis treatment compared with CKD 3. Hazard ratios for incidence of major amputation were 9.5 (95% CI, 2.1-43.0) and 15 (95% CI, 3.3-71.0), respectively. Conclusions CKD 4-5 and dialysis treatment are independent risk factors for foot ulceration and major amputation compared with CKD 3. Maximum effort is needed in daily clinical practice to prevent foot ulcers and their devastating consequences in all individuals with CKD 4-5 or dialysis treatment.

Application of data mining techniques in the prediction of coronary artery disease : use of anaesthesia time-series and patient risk factor data

The high morbidity and mortality associated with atherosclerotic coronary vascular disease (CVD) and its complications are being lessened by the increased knowledge of risk factors, effective preventative measures and proven therapeutic interventions. However, significant CVD morbidity remains and sudden cardiac death continues to be a presenting feature for some subsequently diagnosed with CVD. Coronary vascular disease is also the leading cause of anaesthesia related complications. Stress electrocardiography/exercise testing is predictive of 10 year risk of CVD events and the cardiovascular variables used to score this test are monitored peri-operatively. Similar physiological time-series datasets are being subjected to data mining methods for the prediction of medical diagnoses and outcomes. This study aims to find predictors of CVD using anaesthesia time-series data and patient risk factor data. Several pre-processing and predictive data mining methods are applied to this data. Physiological time-series data related to anaesthetic procedures are subjected to pre-processing methods for removal of outliers, calculation of moving averages as well as data summarisation and data abstraction methods. Feature selection methods of both wrapper and filter types are applied to derived physiological time-series variable sets alone and to the same variables combined with risk factor variables. The ability of these methods to identify subsets of highly correlated but non-redundant variables is assessed. The major dataset is derived from the entire anaesthesia population and subsets of this population are considered to be at increased anaesthesia risk based on their need for more intensive monitoring (invasive haemodynamic monitoring and additional ECG leads). Because of the unbalanced class distribution in the data, majority class under-sampling and Kappa statistic together with misclassification rate and area under the ROC curve (AUC) are used for evaluation of models generated using different prediction algorithms. The performance based on models derived from feature reduced datasets reveal the filter method, Cfs subset evaluation, to be most consistently effective although Consistency derived subsets tended to slightly increased accuracy but markedly increased complexity. The use of misclassification rate (MR) for model performance evaluation is influenced by class distribution. This could be eliminated by consideration of the AUC or Kappa statistic as well by evaluation of subsets with under-sampled majority class. The noise and outlier removal pre-processing methods produced models with MR ranging from 10.69 to 12.62 with the lowest value being for data from which both outliers and noise were removed (MR 10.69). For the raw time-series dataset, MR is 12.34. Feature selection results in reduction in MR to 9.8 to 10.16 with time segmented summary data (dataset F) MR being 9.8 and raw time-series summary data (dataset A) being 9.92. However, for all time-series only based datasets, the complexity is high. For most pre-processing methods, Cfs could identify a subset of correlated and non-redundant variables from the time-series alone datasets but models derived from these subsets are of one leaf only. MR values are consistent with class distribution in the subset folds evaluated in the n-cross validation method. For models based on Cfs selected time-series derived and risk factor (RF) variables, the MR ranges from 8.83 to 10.36 with dataset RF_A (raw time-series data and RF) being 8.85 and dataset RF_F (time segmented time-series variables and RF) being 9.09. The models based on counts of outliers and counts of data points outside normal range (Dataset RF_E) and derived variables based on time series transformed using Symbolic Aggregate Approximation (SAX) with associated time-series pattern cluster membership (Dataset RF_ G) perform the least well with MR of 10.25 and 10.36 respectively. For coronary vascular disease prediction, nearest neighbour (NNge) and the support vector machine based method, SMO, have the highest MR of 10.1 and 10.28 while logistic regression (LR) and the decision tree (DT) method, J48, have MR of 8.85 and 9.0 respectively. DT rules are most comprehensible and clinically relevant. The predictive accuracy increase achieved by addition of risk factor variables to time-series variable based models is significant. The addition of time-series derived variables to models based on risk factor variables alone is associated with a trend to improved performance. Data mining of feature reduced, anaesthesia time-series variables together with risk factor variables can produce compact and moderately accurate models able to predict coronary vascular disease. Decision tree analysis of time-series data combined with risk factor variables yields rules which are more accurate than models based on time-series data alone. The limited additional value provided by electrocardiographic variables when compared to use of risk factors alone is similar to recent suggestions that exercise electrocardiography (exECG) under standardised conditions has limited additional diagnostic value over risk factor analysis and symptom pattern. The effect of the pre-processing used in this study had limited effect when time-series variables and risk factor variables are used as model input. In the absence of risk factor input, the use of time-series variables after outlier removal and time series variables based on physiological variable values’ being outside the accepted normal range is associated with some improvement in model performance.

TNF and TNF receptor expression and insulin sensitivity in human omental and subcutaneous adipose tissue--influence of BMI and adipose distribution

Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)alpha is implicated in the relationship between obesity and insulin resistance/ type 2 diabetes. In an effort to understand this association better we (i) profiled gene expression patterns of TNF, TNFR1 and TNFR2 and (ii) investigated the effects of TNF on glucose uptake in isolated adipocytes and adipose tissue explants from omental and subcutaneous depots from lean, overweight and obese individuals. TNF expression correlated with expression of TNFR2, but not TNFR1, and TNF and TNFR2 expression increased in obesity. TNFR1 expression was higher in omental than in subcutaneous adipocytes. Expression levels of TNF or either receptor did not differ between adipocytes from individuals with central and peripheral obesity. TNF only suppressed glucose uptake in insulin-stimulated subcutaneous tissue and this suppression was only observed in tissue from lean subjects. These data support a relationship between the TNF system and body mass index (BMI), but not fat distribution, and suggest depot specificity of the TNF effect on glucose uptake. Furthermore, adipose tissue from obese subjects already appears insulin 'resistant' and this may be a result of the increased TNF levels.

Serum levels of soluble receptor for advanced glycation end products and of S100 proteins are associated with inflammatory, autoantibody, and classical risk markers of joint and vascular damage in rheumatoid arthritis

Introduction: The receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE) is a member of the immunoglobulin superfamily of cell surface receptor molecules. High concentrations of three of its putative proinflammatory ligands, S100A8/A9 complex (calprotectin), S100A8, and S100A12, are found in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) serum and synovial fluid. In contrast, soluble RAGE (sRAGE) may prevent proinflammatory effects by acting as a decoy. This study evaluated the serum levels of S100A9, S100A8, S100A12 and sRAGE in RA patients, to determine their relationship to inflammation and joint and vascular damage. Methods: Serum sRAGE, S100A9, S100A8 and S100A12 levels from 138 patients with established RA and 44 healthy controls were measured by ELISA and compared by unpaired t test. In RA patients, associations with disease activity and severity variables were analyzed by simple and multiple linear regressions. Results: Serum S100A9, S100A8 and S100A12 levels were correlated in RA patients. S100A9 levels were associated with body mass index (BMI), and with serum levels of S100A8 and S100A12. S100A8 levels were associated with serum levels of S100A9, presence of anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA), and rheumatoid factor (RF). S100A12 levels were associated with presence of ACPA, history of diabetes, and serum S100A9 levels. sRAGE levels were negatively associated with serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL), history of vasculitis, and the presence of the RAGE 82Ser polymorphism. Conclusions: sRAGE and S100 proteins were associated not just with RA inflammation and autoantibody production, but also with classical vascular risk factors for end-organ damage. Consistent with its role as a RAGE decoy molecule, sRAGE had the opposite effects to S100 proteins in that S100 proteins were associated with autoantibodies and vascular risk, whereas sRAGE was associated with protection against joint and vascular damage. These data suggest that RAGE activity influences co-development of joint and vascular disease in rheumatoid arthritis patients.

The Queensland high risk foot form (QHRFF): Is it a reliable and valid clinical research tool for foot disease?

Background Foot disease complications, such as foot ulcers and infection, contribute to considerable morbidity and mortality. These complications are typically precipitated by “high-risk factors”, such as peripheral neuropathy and peripheral arterial disease. High-risk factors are more prevalent in specific “at risk” populations such as diabetes, kidney disease and cardiovascular disease. To the best of the authors’ knowledge a tool capturing multiple high-risk factors and foot disease complications in multiple at risk populations has yet to be tested. This study aimed to develop and test the validity and reliability of a Queensland High Risk Foot Form (QHRFF) tool. Methods The study was conducted in two phases. Phase one developed a QHRFF using an existing diabetes foot disease tool, literature searches, stakeholder groups and expert panel. Phase two tested the QHRFF for validity and reliability. Four clinicians, representing different levels of expertise, were recruited to test validity and reliability. Three cohorts of patients were recruited; one tested criterion measure reliability (n = 32), another tested criterion validity and inter-rater reliability (n = 43), and another tested intra-rater reliability (n = 19). Validity was determined using sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values (PPV). Reliability was determined using Kappa, weighted Kappa and intra-class correlation (ICC) statistics. Results A QHRFF tool containing 46 items across seven domains was developed. Criterion measure reliability of at least moderate categories of agreement (Kappa > 0.4; ICC > 0.75) was seen in 91% (29 of 32) tested items. Criterion validity of at least moderate categories (PPV > 0.7) was seen in 83% (60 of 72) tested items. Inter- and intra-rater reliability of at least moderate categories (Kappa > 0.4; ICC > 0.75) was seen in 88% (84 of 96) and 87% (20 of 23) tested items respectively. Conclusions The QHRFF had acceptable validity and reliability across the majority of items; particularly items identifying relevant co-morbidities, high-risk factors and foot disease complications. Recommendations have been made to improve or remove identified weaker items for future QHRFF versions. Overall, the QHRFF possesses suitable practicality, validity and reliability to assess and capture relevant foot disease items across multiple at risk populations.

Prevalence of foot disease and risk factors in general inpatient populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To systematically review studies reporting the prevalence in general adult inpatient populations of foot disease disorders (foot wounds, foot infections, collective ‘foot disease’) and risk factors (peripheral arterial disease (PAD), peripheral neuropathy (PN), foot deformity). Methods: A systematic review of studies published between 1980 and 2013 was undertaken using electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL). Keywords and synonyms relating to prevalence, inpatients, foot disease disorders and risk factors were used. Studies reporting foot disease or risk factor prevalence data in general inpatient populations were included. Included study's reference lists and citations were searched and experts consulted to identify additional relevant studies. 2 authors, blinded to each other, assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Applicable data were extracted by 1 author and checked by a second author. Prevalence proportions and SEs were calculated for all included studies. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects models where 3 eligible studies were available. Results: Of the 4972 studies initially identified, 78 studies reporting 84 different cohorts (total 60 231 517 participants) were included. Foot disease prevalence included: foot wounds 0.01–13.5% (70 cohorts), foot infections 0.05–6.4% (7 cohorts), collective foot disease 0.2–11.9% (12 cohorts). Risk factor prevalence included: PAD 0.01–36.0% (10 cohorts), PN 0.003–2.8% (6 cohorts), foot deformity was not reported. Pooled prevalence estimates were only able to be calculated for pressure ulcer-related foot wounds 4.6% (95% CI 3.7% to 5.4%)), diabetes-related foot wounds 2.4% (1.5% to 3.4%), diabetes-related foot infections 3.4% (0.2% to 6.5%), diabetes-related foot disease 4.7% (0.3% to 9.2%). Heterogeneity was high in all pooled estimates (I2=94.2–97.8%, p<0.001). Conclusions: This review found high heterogeneity, yet suggests foot disease was present in 1 in every 20 inpatients and a major risk factor in 1 in 3 inpatients. These findings are likely an underestimate and more robust studies are required to provide more precise estimates.

How many inpatients in our hospitals have foot complications? The foot disease in inpatients study

Background Foot complications have been found to affect large proportions of hospital in patients with diabetes. However, no studies have investigated the proportion of foot complications affecting all people in general inpatient populations. The aims of this cross-sectional study were to investigate the point-prevalence of different foot complications in general inpatient populations, analyse differences in diabetes and non-diabetes sub-groups, and examine characteristics of people primarily admitted for a foot complication. Methods Eligible participants were all adults admitted overnight, for any reason, into five diverse hospitals on one day; excluding maternity, mental health and cognitively impaired patients. All participants underwent a physical foot examination, by trained podiatrists using validated measures, to clinically diagnose different foot complications; including foot wounds, infections, deformity, peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and peripheral neuropathy (PN). Data were also collected on participants' primary reason for admission and a range of demographic, social determinant, medical history, foot complication history, self-care and footwear risk factors. Results Overall, 733 participants consented (83% of eligible participants); mean(±SD) age 62(±19) years, 480 (55.8%) male and 172 (23.5%) had diabetes. Foot complication prevalence included: wounds 9.0% (95% CI) (5.1-8.7), infections 3.3% (2.2-4.9), deformity 22.4% (19.5-26.7), PAD 21.0% (18.2-24.1) and PN 22.0% (19.1-25.1). Diabetes populations had significantly more foot complications than non-diabetes (p < 0.01); wounds (15.7% vs 7.0%), infections (7.1% vs 2.2%), deformity (30.5% vs 19.9%), PAD (35.1% vs 16.7%) and PN (43.3% vs 15.4%). Foot complications were the primary reason for admission in 7.4% (95% CI) (5.7-9.5) of all participants. In a backwards stepwise multivariate analysis having a foot complication as the primary reason for admission was independently associated (OR (95% CI) with foot wounds (18.9 (7.3-48.7)), foot infections (6.0 (1.6-22.4)), history of amputation (4.7 (1.3-17.0) and PAD (2.9 (1.3-6.6)). Conclusions Findings of this study indicate one in every ten hospital inpatients had an active foot wound or infection. In patients with diabetes had significantly higher proportions of foot complications than non-diabetes inpatients. Remarkably one in every thirteen inpatients in this study were primarily hospitalised for a foot complication. Further research and policy is required to tackle this seemingly large inpatient foot complication burden.