P. Fontaine

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article was to identify criteria predictive of remission in nonsurgical treatment of diabetic foot osteomyelitis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Diabetic patients who were initially treated without orthopedic surgery for osteomyelitis of the toe or metatarsal head of a nonischemic foot between June 2002 and June 2003 in nine French diabetic foot centers were identified, and their medical records were reviewed. Remission was defined as the absence of any sign of infection at the initial or contiguous site assessed at least 1 year after the end of treatment. A total of 24 demographic, clinical, and therapeutic variables including bone versus swab culture-based antibiotic therapy were analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty consecutive patients aged 62.2 +/- 11.1 years (mean +/- SD) with diabetes duration of 16 +/- 10.9 years were included. The mean duration of antibiotic treatment was 11.5 +/- 4.21 weeks. Bone biopsy was routinely available in four of the nine centers. Overall patient management was similar in the different centers except for the use of rifampin, which was recorded more frequently in patients from centers in which a bone biopsy was available. At the end of a 12.8-month posttreatment mean follow-up, 32 patients (64%) were in remission. Bone culture-based antibiotic therapy was the only variable associated with remission, as determined by both univariate (18 of 32 [56.3%] vs. 4 of 18 [22.2%], P = 0.02) and multivariate analyses (odds ratio 4.78 [95% CI 1.0-22.7], P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Bone culture-based antibiotic therapy is a factor predictive of success in diabetic patients treated nonsurgically for osteomyelitis of the foot.

BACKGROUND: Unprecedented federal interest and funding are focused on secure, standardized, electronic transfer of health information among health care organizations, termed health information exchange (HIE). The stated goals are improvements in health care quality, efficiency, and cost. Ambulatory primary care practices are essential to this process; however, the factors that motivate them to participate in HIE are not well studied, particularly among small practices. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature about HIE participation from January 1990 through mid-September 2008 to identify peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed publications in bibliographic databases and websites. Reviewers abstracted each publication for predetermined key issues, including stakeholder participation in HIE, and the benefits, barriers, and overall value to primary care practices. We identified themes within each key issue, then grouped themes and identified supporting examples for analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen peer-reviewed, non-peer-reviewed, and web publications were retrieved, and 61 met inclusion criteria. Of 39 peer-reviewed publications, one-half reported original research. Among themes of cost savings, workflow efficiency, and quality, the only benefits to be reliably documented were those regarding efficiency, including improved access to test results and other data from outside the practice and decreased staff time for handling referrals and claims processing. Barriers included cost, privacy and liability concerns, organizational characteristics, and technical barriers. A positive return on investment has not been documented. CONCLUSIONS: The potential for HIE to reduce costs and improve the quality of health care in ambulatory primary care practices is well recognized but needs further empiric substantiation.