
==== Front
Heliyon
Heliyon
Heliyon
2405-8440
Elsevier

S2405-8440(24)12040-3
10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36009
e36009
Review Article
Research hotspots and trends in nursing for diabetic foot ulcers: A bibliometric analysis from 2013 to 2023
Li Xiaoyun a
Chen Dongfeng b
Wang Chen b
Fan Jingna c
Wang Zhixin b
Liu Yingjun b
Wang Wenkuan b
Kong Chang 60060055@sdutcm.edu.cn
a⁎
a School of Nursing, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, 250355, China
b First Clinical Medical School, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, 250355, China
c College of Integrative Chinese and Western Medicine, Jining Medical University, Jining, 272067, China
⁎ Corresponding author. 60060055@sdutcm.edu.cn
08 8 2024
30 8 2024
08 8 2024
10 16 e3600918 3 2024
1 8 2024
7 8 2024
© 2024 The Authors
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Background

Nursing can effectively prevent and ameliorate diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). However, there is a lack of literature on the bibliometric analysis of DFU nursing. This study aimed to analyze the research hotspots and development trends in DFU nursing over the past 10 years to provide references for future related research.

Methods

The Web of Science Core Collection was used to retrieve literature related to DFU nursing from 2013 to 2023. Analyses included the annual publication trends; author, institution, and country collaborations; journal and literature co-citation; and keyword co-occurrence, clustering, and bursting, performed using CiteSpace 5.8 R3.

Results

A total of 229 papers were included, showing an upward trend in annual publications. American scholar David G Armstrong (n = 3) and King's College Hospital London (n = 4) were the most productive authors and institutions, respectively. The United States ranked first (n = 45) in national contributions, followed by China and Brazil. The overall research strength between authors and institutions was relatively scattered, and intensive cooperation has not yet been formed. National collaborations resulted in a core team dominated by Europe and North America with concentrated research strengths. The most frequently co-cited journal and co-cited reference were Diabetes Care (111 citations) and Armstrong DG (2017) (131 citations), separately. Research hotspots mainly focused on risk assessment, classification systems, protective measures, and clinical management of DFU. “Primary care” and “intervention efficacy” were identified as the research trends in the coming years.

Conclusion

The field of DFU nursing requires more attention. Academic exchange and cooperation between authors, institutions, and countries should be strengthened. Our future research will focus on the latest hotspots and trends, conducting more in-depth and comprehensive studies on DFU management.

Keywords

Diabetic foot ulcers
DFU
Nursing
Bibliometrics
CiteSpace
==== Body
pmc1 Introduction

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a severe complication of diabetes mellitus, primarily caused by a combination of neuropathy and varying degrees of vascular disease due to poor glycemic control. It manifests as lower extremity infections, ulcer formation, or deep tissue damage. In severe cases, amputation may be required, significantly increasing the risk of death [1]. Data show that approximately 18.6 million people worldwide are affected by DFU each year [2], with approximately 20 % undergoing amputation [3], and the 5-year mortality rate exceeds 70 % post-amputation [4]. Additionally, the high cost of DFU treatment places a heavy burden on patients, their families, healthcare professionals, and the society [4]. Therefore, it is vital to effectively prevent the occurrence and development of DFU.

Nursing is critical for preventing ulcer recurrence and promoting wound healing. As educators, nursing specialists [5], can provide patients and their families with relevant foot care knowledge and teach foot care skills to reduce ulcer recurrence and amputation rates. Moreover, professional nursing staff can monitor and comprehensively evaluate wounds [6], providing a basis for medical decision-making by healthcare professionals and increasing the treatment efficacy by selecting adjunctive measures based on assessment results.

Currently, there have been many achievements in the field of DFU nursing, mainly focusing on interventions, health education, risk factors, and management of foot ulcers. However, most studies are relatively single and need more integration of the overall content. Additionally, the outcomes of traditional literature reviews are susceptible to subjective factors and lack sufficient credibility [7], while the field lacks quantitative studies using numerical tools and statistical methods.

Bibliometrics is an effective method used in medical research to effectively analyze and describe research trends [8]. CiteSpace, a commonly used analytical tool in bibliometrics, is a Java application developed by Chaomei Chen for visual analysis [9,10]. It can extract, process, and identify key points and generate network views to analyze the current situation and frontiers of the field [11]. Therefore, this study aimed to use CiteSpace 5.8 R3 to visually analyze the pertinent literature on DFU nursing research from 2013 to 2023. We aimed to summarize the research status, research hotspots, and frontier trends in the past decade, offering a reference point for subsequent research.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Data source and search strategy

The Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) was selected as the search database for this study. Using a combination of subject words and free words for search, the search strategy was TS= (‘diabetic foot’ OR ‘diabetic feet’ OR ‘diabetic foot ulcer’ OR ‘DFU’) AND TS= (nursing OR nurse*). This strategy retrieved a total of 327 documents.

2.2 Data collation and download

The following inclusion criteria were applied: 1. Publication years: 2013–2023; 2. Literature types: articles and reviews; 241 studies were screened. Second, the titles, abstracts, and related content were independently and manually screened by two researchers, resulting in the exclusion of 12 papers due to irrelevance or poor relevance to the topic of this study, incomplete information, and repeated publications. The results were cross-checked after completion, and disagreements were adjudicated in consultation with a third party. Finally, 229 articles were exported as plain text files, named “download_diabetic foot,” and placed in the input folder. To avoid any discrepancies resulting from daily updates, the search was completed on the same day (October 10, 2023).

2.3 Bibliometrics analysis

This study used Microsoft Excel 2021 to plot annual publication trends and CiteSpace 5.8 R3 for visual analysis. The fixed parameter settings for CiteSpace were as follows: (1) time span from 2013 to 2023, time slice of one year; (2) association strength using the cosine algorithm; (3) threshold selection of g-index, k = 25; and (4) pruning method selection of pathfinder, pruning sliced networks, and pruning the merged network.

3 Results

3.1 Analysis of annual publications

According to the literature-screening flowchart (Fig. 1), 229 publications related to DFU nursing were included between 2013 and 2023, comprising 193 articles and 36 reviews. As shown in Fig. 2, the annual number of publications increased from 13 in 2013 to 31 in 2022 (with incomplete data for 2023), with the highest output being 41 publications in 2020. Although the number of publications fluctuated over the years, the overall trend continues to increase. Additionally, the linear trend line shows a relatively steady increase in publications from 2013 to 2023, predicting that the increasing trend may continue in the coming years.Fig. 1 Bibliometric analysis of nursing of diabetic foot ulcer in the workflow.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2 The annual quantities of nursing of diabetic foot ulcer.

Fig. 2

3.2 Analysis of authors, institutions, and countries

In Table 1, the top 10 authors in terms of publications were all from Europe or North America, with David G. Armstrong ranking first with three publications. The institution with the highest number of papers was King's College Hospital, followed by Bergen University College, and the University of Toronto. As listed in Table 2, the United States was the most productive country (45 articles), followed by China (21 articles) and Brazil (18 articles). Fig. 3 presents collaborative network maps of authors, institutions, and countries. These maps reflect the collaboration among authors, countries, and institutions in this field and can be used to evaluate their impact [12]. The node size represents the frequency or influence of a research object, with its importance is measured by mediating centrality [11], which is proportional to the size of the purple outer circle. The thickness of the lines indicates the strength of the connections between nodes [13]. As shown in Fig. 3(A), the author teams led by Chris Manu collaborated on the largest scale, focusing on topics related to treatment delay. The University of Toronto-led research clusters occupied a central position in Fig. 3(B), with emerging collaborations observed among diverse teams. Moreover, cooperation among nations is relatively close, particularly in the international collaborative force centered around England (Fig. 3(C)).Table 1 Top 10 contributory authors and institutions.

Table 1Rank	Author	Frequency	Institution	Frequency	
1	David G. Armstrong	3	King's College Hospital	4	
2	Álvaro Astasio-Picado	3	Bergen University College	3	
3	Chris Manu	3	University of Toronto	3	
4	Beatriz Gómez-Muñoz	3	Health Sciences University	2	
5	Barbara L Davies	2	Universidade Federal de São Paulo	2	
6	Paula Cobos Moreno	2	Complutense University of Madrid	2	
7	Anna Polak	2	Universidade Federal do Ceará	2	
8	Jon S. Woods	2	Duke University	2	
9	Marjolein M. Lversen	2	Bispebjerg Hospital	2	
10	Benjamin Bouillet	2	University of Arizona	2	

Table 2 Top 10 contributory countries.

Table 2Rank	Country	Frequency	Centrality	Percent	
1	USA	45	0.35	19.65 %	
2	China	21	0.17	9.17 %	
3	Brazil	18	0.2	7.86 %	
4	Canada	17	0.34	7.42 %	
5	England	16	0.7	6.99 %	
6	Spain	14	0.09	6.11 %	
7	Australia	12	0.23	5.24 %	
8	Germany	10	0.09	4.37 %	
9	France	9	0.23	3.93 %	
10	Denmark	7	0.08	3.06 %	

Fig. 3 (A)Authors cooperation network; (B) Institutions cooperation network; (C) Countries cooperation network.

Fig. 3

3.3 Analysis of co-cited journals and references

The top three journals with the highest co-citation frequencies were Diabetes Care (IF = 16.2), International Wound Journal (IF = 3.1), and Diabetes-Metabolism Research and Reviews (IF = 8) (Table 3). In Table 4, Armstrong DG (2017) [14] was the most cited reference, with 26 citations and Lipsky BA (2016) [15] had the strongest betweenness centrality of 0.5. Fig. 4(A) and (B) display the co-citation analysis networks of journals and references, reflecting the disciplinary foundation and developmental changes in the field, as well as the evolution of research topics [12]. The nodes in these maps represent journals or studies, with larger nodes indicating higher frequency of citations. As shown in Fig. 5, we performed a burst analysis of literature co-citations. Based on the burst terms and annual publication volume, 2013–2023 could was divided into three stages: 2013–2016, 2017–2020, and 2021–2023. The studies with the highest burst values during the three periods were Bakker K (2012) [16], Bakker K (2016) [17], and Schaper NC (2020) [18].Table 3 Top 10 co-cited journals.

Table 3Rank	Frequency	Co-cited Journal	
1	131	Diabetes Care	
2	102	International Wound Journal	
3	98	Diabetes-Metabolism Research and Reviews	
4	88	Diabetic Medicine	
5	71	Journal of Wound Care	
6	67	Wound Repair Regen	
7	63	Journal of Vascular Surgery	
8	61	Advances in Skin & Wound Care	
9	57	Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice	
10	55	Diabetologia	

Table 4 Top 10 co-cited references.

Table 4Rank	Frequency	Author	Source	DOI	
1	26	David G. Armstrong	New England Journal of Medicine	10.1056/NEJMra1615439	
2	21	Pengzi Zhang	Annals of Medicine	10.1080/07853890.2016.1231932	
3	9	Nicolaas C. Schaper	Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews	10.1002/dmrr.3266	
4	8	Karel. Bakker	Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews	10.1002/dmrr.2694	
5	8	Anil Hingorani	Journal of Vascular Surgery	10.1016/j.jvs.2015.10.003	
6	7	Laura Coffey	International Wound Journal	10.1111/iwj.13010	
7	7	Sicco A. Bus	Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews	10.1002/dmrr.3269	
8	6	Benjamin A. Lipsky	Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews	10.1002/dmrr.2699	
9	6	David G. Armstrong	Journal of Foot and Ankle Research	10.1186/s13047-020-00383-2	
10	5	Karel. Bakker	Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews	10.1002/dmrr.2253	

Fig. 4 (A) Co-cited journals network; (B) Co-cited references network.

Fig. 4

Fig. 5 The burst detection of co-cited references.

Fig. 5

3.4 Analysis of keyword co-occurrence

The keywords were selected as nodes to generate a keyword co-occurrence network map (Fig. 6). The lines in the map reflect the correlation between keywords, with their thickness indicating the frequency of co-occurrence. The size of the nodes represents the frequency of keyword occurrence. To facilitate processing, keywords with the same meaning were merged as follows: diabetic foot ulcer, diabetic foot, foot ulcer, leg ulcer, diabetic foot infection, diabetic foot disease, and diabetic foot were merged as diabetic foot ulcer; care, nursing, nursing care, and care were merged as care; ulcer and ulceration were merged as ulcer; primary health care and primary care were merged as primary; and foot care, diabetic foot care, and diabetic foot ulcer care were merged as foot care. After merging, keywords were introduced into Excel 2021 for statistical analysis. The top 20 high-frequency keywords are listed in Table 5. Keywords such as prevention, risk, wound healing, and management were highly consistent with the clustered content.Fig. 6 Co-occurrence keywords network.

Fig. 6

Table 5 Top 20 keywords of nursing of diabetes foot ulcer.

Table 5Rank	Frequency	Keyword	Rank	Frequency	Keyword	
1	164	diabetic foot ulcer	11	19	wound healing	
2	70	care	12	17	risk	
3	69	diabetic foot	13	17	infection	
4	52	ulcer	14	16	disease	
5	48	management	15	16	prevalence	
6	31	prevention	16	14	risk factor	
7	25	amputation	17	13	wound	
8	23	quality of life	18	13	pressure ulcer	
9	23	diabetic	19	11	guideline	
10	23	diabetes mellitus	20	10	wound care	

3.5 Analysis of keyword clustering

Keyword clustering is a categorical aggregation of similar or related keywords [11], reflecting hotspots in a research field [12]. Using the LLR algorithm, a timeline map (Fig. 7) and clustering map (Fig. 8) were generated, resulting in 15 clusters with clustering module values of S = 0.8932 and Q = 0.7438. Generally, Q > 0.3 represents that the clustering structure is significant. When S ≥ 0.7, the results are convincing, and when S > 0.5, the clustering structure is reasonable [12]. Thus, this clustering has high confidence and a significant structure.Fig. 7 The timeline view of keywords.

Fig. 7

Fig. 8 Cluster analysis of keywords.

Fig. 8

3.6 Analysis of keywords burst detection

A keyword burst refers to a sudden increase in keywords in a particular period, which is usually associated with hotspot transitions in the research field. As shown in Fig. 9, the burst words from 2021 to 2023 included “nursing,” “efficacy,” “outcome,” “primary,” and “leg ulcer.”Fig. 9 The burst detection of co-cited references.

Fig. 9

4 Discussion

4.1 General information

Annual publications in DFU nursing research showed integral growth, with a relatively stable annual growth rate, indicating increasing attention from researchers to this field. However, the total number of publications over the last decade has been relatively low, which could be attributed to the late start of nursing research [19] and the weak research strength. There is still considerable space and potential for future development in this field. Regarding publication time, fluctuations in 2013–2016 may be related to the early stage of the exploration period, and the slower growth from 2020 to 2023 may be related to the shift in research focus caused by the COVID-19 pandemic [20,21]. Moreover, because this study was conducted until October 2023, the number of publications for the year was limited.

Regarding research power, the top 10 authors with publications were all from North America or Europe, suggesting that the number of publications was influenced by the economy to some extent [22]. High-producing institutions were dominated by universities, which may be related to the attention and solid academic atmosphere of higher education institutions and universities [22]. Among the top 10 countries in terms of publications, developed and developing countries accounted for 80 % and 20 %, respectively. China and Brazil ranked second and third, respectively, but their intermediary centrality was low, indicating that developing countries have paid more attention to this field and published more papers in recent years; however, academic influence still needs to be enhanced. The United Kingdom had a strong intermediary centrality and was leading in this field. From the cooperation network diagram, it is not difficult to see that the cooperation between authors and institutions was in a state of overall dispersion and local concentration and had not yet formed intensive cooperation. This suggests that communication and cooperation between the authors and institutions should be strengthened. Collaboration between countries has formed a core team dominated by Europe and North America, indicating that they hold a particular discourse in the field of DFU nursing. Future research in this area could consider the literature from this region as a primary reference.

At the co-citation level, journals mainly covered skin wound repair, endocrine metabolism, and vascular surgery. Most of the top 10 cited journals were in the Q1 or Q2 area of the JRC partition, with high article quality. The journal with the highest IF index was Diabetes Care (IF = 16.2) from the United States, which primarily publishes clinical nursing research, cardiovascular and metabolic risks, and so on, and prefers to publish high-quality original articles reflecting advances and trends in endocrinology and metabolism. As Fig. 4(A) and (B) showed, the high number of reference co-citations suggests similarities in knowledge structure, and the close links between journals indicate a strong correlation between knowledge foundations. Among the reference co-citations, Bakker K (2012) [16], Bakker K (2016) [17], and Schaper NC(2020) [18] played a significant role in the three periods. Bakker K (2012) described the principles of prevention and treatment based on the International Consensus on Diabetic Foot, includ foot management, wound assessment, treatment, and tissue management. Based on a systematic review, Bakker (2016) provided guidance related to foot complications in patients with diabetes regarding prevention, footwear and offloading, peripheral artery disease, infections, and wound-healing interventions. Schaper (2020) summarized the basic principles of DFU prevention and management into six categories, described the organizational levels to successfully prevent and treat diabetic foot disease according to these principles, and provided an addenda to assist with foot screening.

4.2 Research hotspots

By analyzing high-frequency keywords and clustering labels, this study summarized the research hotspots in DFU nursing, which focuses on four hotspots: risk assessment, classification systems, protective measures, and clinical management of DFU.

4.2.1 Risk assessment

Comprehensive foot evaluation in patients with DFU can reduce disability and amputation rates and improve prognosis [1]. The IWGDF recommends that diabetic patients who are not at risk undergo an annual foot examination to identify the potential risk of foot ulcers and amputations, and at-risk patients require more frequent foot screening [23]. Foot examinations mainly involved the patient's medical history and the nerves, blood vessels, skin, and musculoskeletal aspects of the lower extremities [24]. Currently, most studies have focused on abnormal skin and musculoskeletal changes in the feet, such as skin temperature [[25], [26], [27]], skin color [28,29], and pressure [27,30], with less attention paid to peripheral neurological and vascular aspects. Additionally, the application of new technologies has also improved the efficiency of diabetic foot risk assessment, for instance, the “Exame dos Pés” application by Cuidar Tech [31] and the digital tool D-Foot software [32].

4.2.2 Classification systems

The DFU classification system is widely used to predict the risk and outcome of foot amputation and influences treatment strategies [33]. Numerous classification systems for DFU have been promoted [34], with the Meggitt-Wagner system and the Texas system being the most frequently utilized. The Meggitt-Wagner system divides foot ulcers into six grades based on the depth of the ulcer, presence or absence of complications, and degree of gangrene, with higher grades associated with more severe injuries [35]. The Texas system categorizes wounds into four classes based on lesion type and ulcer depth, presented in a 4 × 4 matrix table, which helps predict ulcer amputations [35,36]. Compared to the Meggitt-Wagner system, the Texas system demonstrated greater accuracy and utility in prediction and assessment [37].

4.2.3 Protective measures

Auxiliary therapy, including wound dressing, negative-pressure wound therapy, and hyperbaric oxygen, plays a vital role in DFU nursing. Dressing is one of the first-line therapeutic approaches for wound management and is used to provide a favorable wound environment for healing [38,39]. The application of advanced dressings such as gels made from amniotic fluid (AF), novel multifunctional amorphous hydrogels, and recombinant human epidermal growth factor dressings positively affects DFU healing [[40], [41], [42]]. Negative-pressure wound therapy should be considered if the wound dressing does not have the desired effect after 4–8 weeks of application [43]. Although negative pressure therapy has demonstrated superiority in treating complex wounds [[44], [45], [46]], particularly in terms of safety and efficacy [45,47,48], the level of research evidence for negative pressure therapy in foot ulcers to date is low [44,49,50], and the research depth in this field should be strengthened in the future.

A lack of diabetes-related knowledge and foot care practices is a risk factor for DFU [51]. Health education can improve the self-protection potential of patients and play a positive role in the prevention [31,[52], [53], [54]]. The IWGDF Prevention Guidelines (2023) recommend that professional trainers provide patients with structured education on foot self-care, that is, any form of structured education offered to individuals in a structured way. The content includes providing general information about the disease (e.g., clinical manifestations, treatment measures, risk factors, and prognostic outcomes) [55], developing individualized preventive plans [56], conducting foot self-care education (e.g., foot examination, keeping the feet clean and dry, choosing the proper footwear), identifying problems, and seeking help promptly [53]. However, current research has mostly neglected mental health education, which should be emphasized in future studies.

Moreover, the development of new technologies, such as the increasing attention paid to sensor-based monitoring tools, has contributed significantly to prevention [30]. Liliana B Sousa presented a sensor-based therapeutic footwear program for DFU prevention by monitoring plantar pressure, temperature, and humidity [57]. The AI wound imaging mobile application (C4W system), which uses sensors as a 3D wound measurement tool with depth perception, verified the reliability of its measurement values among and within evaluators [58].

4.2.4 Clinical management

Multidisciplinary teams have shown significant effectiveness in reducing amputation rates [46,[59], [60], [61], [62], [63]]. These teams are typically comprised of specialists in endocrinology, peripheral vascular surgery, orthopedics, podiatric surgery, and nurse specialists. They provide a wide range of nursing services through transparent referral processes and care algorithms. However, delay in treatment may be related to the patient's cognitive level, healthcare professionalism, structural barriers in referral pathways, etc., with direct detrimental effects on patient prognosis [59,[64], [65], [66]]. Thus, to decrease the incidence of treatment delays, it is necessary to establish education programs [67], improve the foot nursing education system, encourage professional nurses to participate in relevant training and education [53,68], and reinforce team communication and cooperation. Furthermore, telemedicine care models with Internet-based access facilitate communication within the cross-team, improve the knowledge of professionals, and have become an essential way to manage DFU patients during the COVID-19 pandemic [69,70]. In summary, a multidisciplinary team is the best approach for the treatment of complex wounds. However, treatment delays remain a challenge in current clinical management and this aspect needs to be studied more thoroughly in the future.

4.3 Research trends

Based on a burst word analysis from 2021 to 2023, the research trends in DFU nursing are expected to focus on primary care and intervention efficacy in the coming years. In many European countries, primary care is usually the first stage of treatment for patients with chronic wounds [64,71], involving assessment, diagnosis, treatment, and referral by qualified healthcare professionals [64,72]. To avoid early diagnostic errors, primary care medical personnel should enhance their management, improve professionalism [64] emphasize health education, enhance self-management ability, and optimize team structures to formulate the best treatment strategies. Relevant institutions and departments should also improve the primary health care system by establishing a “one-stop” service for chronic diseases, optimizing the “admission-discharge-continuing care” procedure, strengthening the development and utilization of new technologies, and applying offline-based and online-assisted treatment methods to coordinate and arrange the best treatment pathways. More importantly, the state should provide applicable policies and financial support based on its national conditions and establish relevant laws and regulations to ensure regular operation of the healthcare system [73]. Recently, the focus of wound management has shifted to intervention efficacy, aiming to reduce the amputation rate, with a particular emphasis on the intervention effects of adjunctive therapies. For instance, it summarizes the relevant usage of dressings, existing evidence [74], and the effectiveness of negative pressure therapy [43].

5 Limitations

This study has some limitations. First, the data for this study were obtained only from the WOSCC database; other databases were ignored, which may have omitted some relevant studies and led to biased results. Second, we only included studies published until October 2023, which may have caused research content biases. Third, the CiteSpace software is challenging to control because of time zones and related parameter settings, resulting in an inability to ensure that all critical key points are found [11]; therefore, the results are limited to the procedures and rules followed in this study. In the future, searches should be expanded to obtain more comprehensive and up-to-date data and reduce the adverse effects of language and time of publication.

6 Conclusions

In this study, we used bibliometric methods to analyze the literature related to DFU nursing research from 2013 to 2023, and summarized the general situation, hotspots, and trends in the field. To a certain extent, this study provides a reference for future studies. Despite the rising interest in the field, the annual and total number of publications is relatively low compared with other medical disciplines; therefore, it still needs more attention. There remains a need to strengthen communication and cooperation among authors, institutions, and countries. The most prominent research hotspots in the last decade have been risk assessment, protective measures, and clinical management of DFU. It is predicted that future research on DFU nursing will develop towards primary care and intervention efficacy.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Funding statement

This study was supported by the 10.13039/501100001809 National Natural Science Foundation of China (82104727 ).

Data availability statement

Data openly available in a public repository: https://www.webofscience.com/wos.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Xiaoyun Li: Writing – original draft. Dongfeng Chen: Visualization, Software. Chen Wang: Validation, Software. Jingna Fan: Visualization, Software. Zhixin Wang: Visualization, Software. Yingjun Liu: Investigation. Wenkuan Wang: Investigation. Chang Kong: Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgment

This research work was supported by the National Natural Science.
==== Refs
References

1 Wang A. Lv G. Cheng X. Ma X. Wang W. Gui J. Hu J. Lu M. Chu G. Chen J. Zhang H. Jiang Y. Chen Y. Yang W. Jiang L. Geng H. Zheng R. Li Y. Feng W. Johnson B. Wang W. Zhu D. Hu Y. Guidelines on multidisciplinary approaches for the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (2020 edition) Burns & Trauma 8 2020 tkaa017 10.1093/burnst/tkaa017
2 Zhang Y. Lazzarini P.A. McPhail S.M. van Netten J.J. Armstrong D.G. Pacella R.E. Global disability burdens of diabetes-related lower-extremity complications in 1990 and 2016 Diabetes Care 43 2020 964 974 10.2337/dc19-1614 32139380
3 McDermott K. Fang M. Boulton A.J.M. Selvin E. Hicks C.W. Etiology, epidemiology, and disparities in the burden of diabetic foot ulcers Diabetes Care 46 2023 209 221 10.2337/dci22-0043 36548709
4 Armstrong D.G. Swerdlow M.A. Armstrong A.A. Conte M.S. Padula W.V. Bus S.A. Five year mortality and direct costs of care for people with diabetic foot complications are comparable to cancer J. Foot Ankle Res. 13 2020 16 10.1186/s13047-020-00383-2 32209136
5 Chen H. Lv X. Zhang Y. Effect of nursing intervention on promoting healing of rw in patients with diabetic foot: a systematic review and meta-analysis Comput. Math. Methods Med. 2022 2022 e8284870 10.1155/2022/8284870
6 Addison N.O. Pfau S. Koka E. Aboagye S.Y. Kpeli G. Pluschke G. Yeboah-Manu D. Junghanss T. Assessing and managing wounds of Buruli ulcer patients at the primary and secondary health care levels in Ghana PLoS Neglected Trop. Dis. 11 2017 e0005331 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005331
7 Aguinis H. Ramani R.S. Alabduljader N. What you see is what you get? Enhancing methodological transparency in management research ANNALS 12 2018 83 110 10.5465/annals.2016.0011
8 Liu T. Yang L. Mao H. Ma F. Wang Y. Zhan Y. Knowledge domain and emerging trends in podocyte injury research from 1994 to 2021: a bibliometric and visualized analysis Front. Pharmacol. 12 2021 10.3389/fphar.2021.772386
9 Chen C. Song M. Visualizing a field of research: a methodology of systematic scientometric reviews PLoS One 14 2019 e0223994 10.1371/journal.pone.0223994
10 Chen C. Searching for intellectual turning points: progressive knowledge domain visualization Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101 2004 5303 5310 10.1073/pnas.0307513100 14724295
11 Chen C. CiteSpace II: detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 57 2006 359 377 10.1002/asi.20317
12 Chen Y. Chen C. Liu Z. Hu Z. Wang X. The methodology function of CiteSpace mapping knowledge domains Studies in Science of Science 33 2015 242 253 10.16192/j.cnki.1003-2053.2015.02.009
13 Shi Y. Luo J. Wang X. Zhang Y. Zhu H. Su D. Yu W. Tian J. Emerging trends on the correlation between neurotransmitters and tumor progression in the last 20 Years: a bibliometric analysis via CiteSpace Front. Oncol. 12 2022 800499 10.3389/fonc.2022.800499
14 Armstrong D.G. Boulton A.J.M. Bus S.A. Diabetic foot ulcers and their recurrence N. Engl. J. Med. 376 2017 2367 2375 10.1056/NEJMra1615439 28614678
15 Lipsky B.A. Aragón-Sánchez J. Diggle M. Embil J. Kono S. Lavery L. Senneville É. Urbančič-Rovan V. Van Asten S. Peters E.J.G. International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot IWGDF guidance on the diagnosis and management of foot infections in persons with diabetes Diabetes Metab Res Rev 32 Suppl 1 2016 45 74 10.1002/dmrr.2699 26386266
16 Bakker K. Apelqvist J. Schaper N.C. on behalf of the I.W.G. on the D.F.E. Board Practical guidelines on the management and prevention of the diabetic foot 2011 Diabetes Metabol. Res. Rev. 28 2012 225 231 10.1002/dmrr.2253
17 Bakker K. Apelqvist J. Lipsky B.a. Van Netten J.j. On behalf of the I.W.G. on the D. Foot (IWGDF), the 2015 IWGDF guidance documents on prevention and management of foot problems in diabetes: development of an evidence-based global consensus Diabetes Metabol. Res. Rev. 32 2016 2 6 10.1002/dmrr.2694
18 Schaper N.C. van Netten J.J. Apelqvist J. Bus S.A. Hinchliffe R.J. Lipsky B.A. Board I.E. Practical Guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (IWGDF 2019 update) Diabetes Metabol. Res. Rev. 36 2020 e3266 10.1002/dmrr.3266
19 Stolley J.M. Buckwalter K.C. Garand L. The evolution of nursing research J Neuromusculoskelet Syst 8 2000 10 15 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6739074/ 31511759
20 Kambhampati S.B.S. Vaishya R. Vaish A. Unprecedented surge in publications related to COVID-19 in the first three months of pandemic: a bibliometric analytic report J Clin Orthop Trauma 11 2020 S304 S306 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.04.030 32405191
21 Delardas O. Giannos P. How COVID-19 affected the journal impact factor of high impact medical journals: bibliometric analysis J. Med. Internet Res. 24 2022 e43089 10.2196/43089
22 Çağıran Z. Sertöz N. Karaman S. Did we get lost in space A step away from 2020? Bibliometric analysis of Turkish-based publications from 2008 to the present in science citation index and citation index-expanded indexed journals in the field of anaesthesiology Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim 48 2020 235 243 10.5152/TJAR.2019.19942 32551452
23 Bus S.A. van Netten J.J. Lavery L.A. Monteiro-Soares M. Rasmussen A. Jubiz Y. Price P.E. On behalf of the I.W.G. on the D. Foot (IWGDF), IWGDF guidance on the prevention of foot ulcers in at-risk patients with diabetes Diabetes Metabol. Res. Rev. 32 2016 16 24 10.1002/dmrr.2696
24 Johnson R. Osbourne A. Rispoli J. Verdin C. The diabetic foot assessment Orthop. Nurs. 37 2018 13 21 10.1097/NOR.0000000000000414 29369130
25 Skafjeld A. Iversen M.M. Holme I. Ribu L. Hvaal K. Kilhovd B.K. A pilot study testing the feasibility of skin temperature monitoring to reduce recurrent foot ulcers in patients with diabetes – a randomized controlled trial BMC Endocr. Disord. 15 2015 1 7 10.1186/s12902-015-0054-x 25572256
26 Lazo-Porras M. Bernabe-Ortiz A. Sacksteder K.A. Gilman R.H. Malaga G. Armstrong D.G. Miranda J.J. Implementation of foot thermometry plus mHealth to prevent diabetic foot ulcers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial Trials 17 2016 206 10.1186/s13063-016-1333-1 27094007
27 Mehmood N. Hariz A. Fitridge R. Voelcker N.H. Applications of modern sensors and wireless technology in effective wound management J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 102 2014 885 895 10.1002/jbm.b.33063
28 Huimin K. Rowledge A.M. Borzdynski C.J. Miller C. Frescos N. McKenzie G. Perry E. McGuiness W. Reliability of a skin diagnostic device in assessing hydration and erythema Adv. Skin Wound Care 30 2017 452 459 10.1097/01.ASW.0000520117.58976.32 28914679
29 Wang L. Pedersen P.C. Strong D.M. Tulu B. Agu E. Ignotz R. Smartphone-based wound assessment system for patients with diabetes IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 62 2015 477 488 10.1109/TBME.2014.2358632 25248175
30 Tran M.-T. Kumar A. Sachan A. Castro M. Allegre W. Feller J.-F. Emerging strategies based on sensors for chronic wound monitoring and management Chemosensors 10 2022 311 10.3390/chemosensors10080311
31 Moreira J.B. Muro E.S. Monteiro L.A. Iunes D.H. de Assis B.B. Chaves E. de C.L. Efeito do grupo operativo no ensino do autocuidado com os pés de diabéticos: ensaio clínico randomizado Rev. Esc. Enferm. USP 54 2020 e03624 10.1590/S1980-220X2019005403624
32 Zügner R. Jarl G. Sundberg L. Tang U.H. Experiences of using a digital tool, the D-foot, in the screening of risk factors for diabetic foot ulcers J. Foot Ankle Res. 15 2022 90 10.1186/s13047-022-00594-9 36514099
33 Oyibo S.O. Jude E.B. Tarawneh I. Nguyen H.C. Harkless L.B. Boulton A.J.M. A comparison of two diabetic foot ulcer classification systems: the wagner and the university of Texas wound classification systems Diabetes Care 24 2001 84 88 10.2337/diacare.24.1.84 11194247
34 Bus S.A. Armstrong D.G. Gooday C. Jarl G. Caravaggi C. Viswanathan V. Lazzarini P.A. On behalf of the I.W.G. on the D. Foot (IWGDF), Guidelines on offloading foot ulcers in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update) Diabetes Metabol. Res. Rev. 36 2020 e3274 10.1002/dmrr.3274
35 Wang X. Yuan C.-X. Xu B. Yu Z. Diabetic foot ulcers: classification, risk factors and management World J. Diabetes 13 2022 1049 1065 10.4239/wjd.v13.i12.1049 36578871
36 Monteiro-Soares M. Boyko E.J. Jeffcoate W. Mills J.L. Russell D. Morbach S. Game F. Diabetic foot ulcer classifications: a critical review Diabetes Metabol. Res. Rev. 36 2020 e3272 10.1002/dmrr.3272
37 Armstrong D.G. Peters E.J.G. Classification of wounds of the diabetic foot Curr Diab Rep 1 2001 233 238 10.1007/s11892-001-0039-1 12643204
38 Wu S. Applewhite A.J. Niezgoda J. Snyder R. Shah J. Cullen B. Schultz G. Harrison J. Hill R. Howell M. Speyrer M. Utra H. de Leon J. Lee W. Treadwell T. Oxidized regenerated cellulose/collagen dressings: review of evidence and recommendations Adv. Skin Wound Care 30 2017 S1 10.1097/01.ASW.0000525951.20270.6c 29049055
39 Hingorani A. LaMuraglia G.M. Henke P. Meissner M.H. Loretz L. Zinszer K.M. Driver V.R. Frykberg R. Carman T.L. Marston W. Mills J.L. Murad M.H. The management of diabetic foot: a clinical practice guideline by the society for vascular surgery in collaboration with the American podiatric medical association and the society for vascular medicine J. Vasc. Surg. 63 2016 3S 21S 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.10.003 26804367
40 Verdú-Soriano J. de Cristino-Espinar M. Luna-Morales S. Dios-Guerra C. Caballero-Villarraso J. Moreno-Moreno P. Casado-Díaz A. Berenguer-Pérez M. Guler-Caamaño I. Laosa-Zafra O. Rodríguez-Mañas L. Lázaro-Martínez J.L. Superiority of a novel multifunctional amorphous hydrogel containing olea europaea leaf extract (EHO-85) for the treatment of skin ulcers: a randomized, active-controlled clinical trial J. Clin. Med. 11 2022 1260 10.3390/jcm11051260 35268352
41 de Oliveira B.G.R.B. Oliveira B.C. Deutsch G. Pessanha F.S. Thiré R.M. da S.M. de Castilho S.R. rhEGF-loaded hydrogel in the treatment of chronic wounds in patients with diabetes: clinical cases Gels 8 2022 523 10.3390/gels8080523 36005124
42 Niami F. Molavynejad S. Hemmati A.A. Bijan Nejad D. Yazdanpanah L. Maram N.S. Saki Malehi A. Mahmoudi M. Evaluation of the effect of a gel made with amniotic fluid formulation on the healing of diabetic foot ulcers: a triple-blind clinical trial Front. Public Health 10 2022 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2022.1025391
43 Astasio-Picado Á. Montero M.D.M. López-Sánchez M. Jurado-Palomo J. Cobos-Moreno P. Gómez-Martín B. The effectiveness of negative pressure therapy: nursing approach J. Personalized Med. 12 2022 1813 10.3390/jpm12111813
44 Zhang D. He L. A systemic review and a meta‐analysis on the influences of closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery by negative pressure wound treatment compared with conventional dressings Int. Wound J. 20 2022 46 54 10.1111/iwj.13835 35535660
45 McElroy E.F. Use of negative pressure wound therapy with instillation and a reticulated open cell foam dressing with through holes in the acute care setting Int. Wound J. 16 2019 781 787 10.1111/iwj.13097 30784210
46 Xu B. Song X. Weng Y. A multidisciplinary team approach for diabetic foot ulcer: a case study Adv. Skin Wound Care 36 2023 1 10.1097/01.ASW.0000920512.88426.90
47 Chen L. Zhang S. Da J. Wu W. Ma F. Tang C. Li G. Zhong D. Liao B. A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of negative pressure wound therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer Ann. Palliat. Med. 10 2021 108300839 108310839 10.21037/apm-21-2476
48 Révész E.S. Altorjay Á. Montskó V. Hangody L. Effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy: minimum five-year follow-up and review of the literature Jt Dis Relat Surg 33 2022 51 56 10.52312/jdrs.2022.547 35361080
49 Rayman G. Vas P. Dhatariya K. Driver V. Hartemann A. Londahl M. Piaggesi A. Apelqvist J. Attinger C. Game F. On behalf of the I.W.G. on the D. Foot (IWGDF), Guidelines on use of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update) Diabetes Metabol. Res. Rev. 36 2020 e3283 10.1002/dmrr.3283
50 P. Chen, N.C. Vilorio, K. Dhatariya, W. Jeffcoate, R. Lobmann, C. McIntosh, A. Piaggesi, J. Steinberg, P. Vas, V. Viswanathan, S. Wu, F. Game, Guidelines on interventions to enhance healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes (IWGDF 2023 update), Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews n/a (n.d.) e3644. 10.1002/dmrr.3644.
51 Singh S. Jajoo S. Shukla S. Acharya S. Educating patients of diabetes mellitus for diabetic foot care J. Fam. Med. Prim. Care 9 2020 367 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_861_19
52 Astasio-Picado Á. Cobos-Moreno P. Gómez-Martín B. Self-care planning and sanitary education in the prevention of the diabetic foot Appl. Sci. 11 2021 7281 10.3390/app11167281
53 Abdulwassi H.K. Safhi M.A. Hashim R.T. Fallatah A.M. Hussein S.S. Almusallam S.A. Alsaad M.S. Alkhatieb M.T. Knowledge of diabetic foot care management among medical students at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Saudi Med. J. 41 2020 59 67 10.15537/smj.2020.1.24812 31915796
54 Anselmo M.I. Nery M. Parisi M.C. The effectiveness of educational practice in diabetic foot: a view from Brazil Diabetol. Metab. Syndrome 2 2010 45 10.1186/1758-5996-2-45
55 Fu X.-J. Hu S.-D. Peng Y.-F. Zhou L.-Y. Shu T. Song D.-D. Observation of the effect of one-to-one education on high-risk cases of diabetic foot World Journal of Clinical Cases 9 2021 3265 3272 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i14.3265 34002135
56 Woo M.W.J. Cui J. Factors influencing foot care behaviour among patients with diabetes: an integrative literature review Nursing Open 10 2023 4216 4243 10.1002/nop2.1710 36973947
57 Sousa L.B. Almeida I. Bernardes R.A. Leite T.R. Negrão R. Apóstolo J. Salgueiro-Oliveira A. Parreira P. A three step protocol for the development of an innovative footwear (shoe and sensor based insole) to prevent diabetic foot ulceration Front. Public Health 11 2023 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1061383
58 Chan K.S. Chan Y.M. Tan A.H.M. Liang S. Cho Y.T. Hong Q. Yong E. Chong L.R.C. Zhang L. Tan G.W.L. Chandrasekar S. Lo Z.J. Clinical validation of an artificial intelligence‐enabled wound imaging mobile application in diabetic foot ulcers Int. Wound J. 19 2022 114 10.1111/iwj.13603 33942998
59 Roberts D.J. Murphy C. Strauss S.A. Brandys T. Corrales-Medina V. Zhang J. Lalonde K.-A. Meulenkamp B. Jennings A. Forster A.J. McIsaac D.I. Nagpal S.K. Structure, processes, and initial outcomes of The Ottawa Hospital Multi-Specialist Limb-Preservation Clinic and Programme: a unique-in-Canada quality improvement initiative Int. Wound J. 19 2022 326 338 10.1111/iwj.13633 34085390
60 Musuuza J. Sutherland B.L. Kurter S. Balasubramanian P. Bartels C.M. Brennan M.B. A systematic review of multidisciplinary teams to reduce major amputations for patients with diabetic foot ulcers J. Vasc. Surg. 71 2020 1433 1446.e3 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.08.244 31676181
61 Wang G. Wang L. Wang Y. Xu X. Multidisciplinary approach to scheduling surgery for diabetic foot: a case report BMC Muscoskel. Disord. 20 2019 168 10.1186/s12891-019-2522-3
62 Walker C.M. Bunch F.T. Cavros N.G. Dippel E.J. Multidisciplinary approach to the diagnosis and management of patients with peripheral arterial disease CIA 10 2015 1147 1153 10.2147/CIA.S79355
63 Chung J. Modrall J.G. Ahn C. Lavery L.A. Valentine R.J. Multidisciplinary care improves amputation-free survival in patients with chronic critical limb ischemia J. Vasc. Surg. 61 2015 162 169.e1 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.05.101 25073577
64 Ahmajärvi K. Isoherranen K. Venermo M. Cohort study of diagnostic delay in the clinical pathway of patients with chronic wounds in the primary care setting BMJ Open 12 2022 e062673 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062673
65 Nickinson A.T.O. Bridgwood B. Houghton J.S.M. Nduwayo S. Pepper C. Payne T. Bown M.J. Davies R.S.M. Sayers R.D. A systematic review investigating the identification, causes, and outcomes of delays in the management of chronic limb-threatening ischemia and diabetic foot ulceration J. Vasc. Surg. 71 2020 669 681.e2 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.08.229 31676182
66 Faglia E. Clerici G. Caminiti M. Quarantiello A. Gino M. Morabito A. The role of early surgical debridement and revascularization in patients with diabetes and deep foot space abscess: retrospective review of 106 patients with diabetes J. Foot Ankle Surg. 45 2006 220 226 10.1053/j.jfas.2006.04.002 16818148
67 Connell L. Finn Y. Sixsmith J. Health literacy education programmes developed for qualified health professionals: a scoping review BMJ Open 13 2023 e070734 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070734
68 Fujii K. Komoda T. Maekawa A. Nishikawa M. Foot care knowledge and practices among Japanese nurses and care workers in home care and adult service center: a cross- sectional study BMC Nurs. 19 2020 75 10.1186/s12912-020-00467-1 32782433
69 Shin L. Bowling F.L. Armstrong D.G. Boulton A.J.M. Saving the diabetic foot during the COVID-19 pandemic: a tale of two cities Diabetes Care 43 2020 1704 1709 10.2337/dc20-1176 32532755
70 Iversen M.M. Igland J. Smith-Strøm H. Østbye T. Tell G.S. Skeie S. Cooper J.G. Peyrot M. Graue M. Effect of a telemedicine intervention for diabetes-related foot ulcers on health, well-being and quality of life: secondary outcomes from a cluster randomized controlled trial (DiaFOTo) BMC Endocr. Disord. 20 2020 157 10.1186/s12902-020-00637-x 33087074
71 Garcia-Klepzig J.L. Sánchez-Ríos J.P. Manu C. Ahluwalia R. Lüdemann C. Meloni M. Lacopi E. De Buruaga V.R.-S. Bouillet B. Vouillarmet J. Lázaro-Martínez J.L. Van Acker K. Perception of diabetic foot ulcers among general practitioners in four European countries: knowledge, skills and urgency J. Wound Care 27 2018 310 319 10.12968/jowc.2018.27.5.310 29738299
72 Sánchez-Ríos J.P. García-Klepzig J.L. Manu C. Ahluwalia R. Lüdemann C. Meloni M. Lacopi E. De Buruaga V.R.-S. Bouillet B. Vouillarmet J. Lázaro-Martínez J.L. Van Acker K. Referral of patients with diabetic foot ulcers in four European countries: patient follow-up after first GP visit J. Wound Care 28 2019 S4 S14 10.12968/jowc.2019.28.Sup8.S4
73 Foo C.D. Surendran S. Tam C.H. Ho E. Matchar D.B. Car J. Koh G.C.H. Perceived facilitators and barriers to chronic disease management in primary care networks of Singapore: a qualitative study BMJ Open 11 2021 e046010 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046010
74 Weller C.D. Team V. Sussman G. First-line interactive wound dressing update: a comprehensive review of the evidence Front. Pharmacol. 11 2020 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2020.00155
