Managing with diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is challenging. Even after infective bone resection and thorough debridement, DFO is still difficult to cure and has a high recurrence rate. This retrospective study aims to compare the outcomes of two treatment methods, infected bone resection combined with adjuvant antibiotic-impregnated calcium sulfate and infected bone resection alone, for the treatment of diabetic foot osteomyelitis. Between 2015 to 2017, 48 limbs (46 patients) with DFO met the criteria were included for assessment. 20 limbs (18 patients) were included in the calcium sulfate group (the CS group) in which vancomycin and/or gentamicin-impregnated calcium sulfate was used as an adjuvant after infected bone resection while 28 limbs (28 patients) as the control group were undergone infected bone resection only. Systemic antibiotics, postoperative wound care and offloading were continued to be applied following surgery in both groups. The time to healing, healing rate, recurrence rate and amputation rate were compared between the two groups. In total, 90% (18/20) limbs in the CS group as compared to 78.6% (22/28) infected limbs in the control group went to heal (P = 0.513). The Mean time to healing was 13.3 weeks in the CS group and 11.2 weeks in control group (P = 0.132). Osteomyelitis recurrence rate was 0% (0/18) in the CS group and 36.4% (8/22) in the control group (P = 0.014). Postoperative leakage in calcium sulfate group was 30.0% (6/20) with a mean duration of 8.5 weeks. Amputation rate in the control group was 7.1% (2/28) compared to 0% (0/20) in the CS group (P = 0.153). Antibiotic-impregnated calcium sulfate as an adjuvant prevents the recurrence of DFO but cannot improve the healing rate, reduce the postoperative amputation rate or shorten the time to healing. Prolonged postoperative leakage as the most common complication can be managed with regular dressing. III, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of expressive writing (EW) versus positive writing (PW) in different populations focusing on mood, health and writing content and to provide a basis for nurses to carry out the targeted treatment.Design: Systematic review and meta‐analysis.Methods: This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines. Twelve electronic databases and references from articles were searched. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EW and PW were included. Statistical analyses were executed using Stata 15.0 software.Results: Twenty‐four RCTs and a total of 1558 participants were analysed. The results showed that for the general population, PW was more positive on mood than EW and could offer more changes in cognitive mechanisms. Among patients, although PW was more conducive to generating positive emotions, EW could stimulate cognitive changes more. Nursing staff should clarify the mechanism of PW and EW, combine the advantages of both and implement intervention according to the characteristics of different populations.No Patient or Public Contribution: It does not apply to your work because this study is an analysis of published studies and does not involve patients or the public.

Introduction: Pain caused by dressing change has adverse effects on patients with a diabetic foot ulcer, including sleep disturbances, immobility, depression and anxiety. It is crucial that healthcare professionals use a standardized tool to assess and document pain during dressing change and then use this information to inform strategies to alleviate the pain. Objectives: The aim of this project was to implement evidence-based practice in assessment and management of pain during dressing change among patients with diabetic foot ulcers in an endocrinology unit in a tertiary hospital. Methods: The JBI Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System (JBI PACES) and Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) audit and feedback tool were used for auditing clinical practice and translating evidence into practice. A baseline audit was performed to assess compliance with six criteria, followed by the implementation of evidence-based interventions to improve compliance. The follow-up audit using the same audit criteria was conducted to assess the effect of targeted strategies on compliance with best practice. Results: The baseline audit revealed that compliance with evidence-based practice was low, with only one of the six audit criteria achieving a compliance rate above 60%. After brainstorming and synthesizing the literature, the project team identified barriers and strategies for implementing best practice. The follow-up audit showed improvements in compliance across all six criteria, although there was only a small improvement in one of the criteria. The compliance rate of the other five criteria improved to greater than 67%. Conclusion: A best practice implementation project that involved standardizing pain assessment and management, and delivering education materials to nursing staff and patients was completed using JBI PACES and GRiP. The project improved nurses’ compliance with best practice. Nurses attach importance to relieving patients’ pain when they perform wound care, while patients with a diabetic foot ulcer gain access to high-quality wound care. Future studies will be conducted to address new barriers that emerged during the follow-up audit.