Diabetes Care
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Diabetes Care 29:945 2006
DOI: 10.2337/diacare.29.04.06.dc05-2450
© 2006 by the American Diabetes Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shone, A.
Right arrow Articles by Jeffcoate, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shone, A.
Right arrow Articles by Jeffcoate, W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Letters: Observations

Probing the Validity of the Probe-to-Bone Test in the Diagnosis of Osteomyelitis of the Foot in Diabetes

Alison Shone, BSC, Jaclyn Burnside, BSC, Susan Chipchase, BSC, Fran Game, FRCP and William Jeffcoate, MRCP

Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Foot Ulcer Trials Unit, City Hospital, Nottingham, U.K.

Address correspondence to William Jeffcoate, Foot Ulcer Trials Unit, Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology, City Hospital, Nottingham NG5 1PB, U.K. E-mail: wjeffcoate@futu.co.uk

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

The ability to probe the base of a wound to periosteum or bone (the "probe-to-bone" test) is increasingly used to indicate the likelihood of underlying osteomyelitis. The original study (1) reported sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of 66, 85, 89, and 56%, respectively. However, this work has been criticized on the grounds of the high pretest probability of the disease (2), since the prevalence of osteomyelitis in the chosen sample (in-patients with clinically overt infection) was 66%. It follows that the usefulness of the test may be very different in less-selected populations. . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Diabetes CareHome page
E. Ghanassia, L. Villon, J.-F. Thuan dit Dieudonne, C. Boegner, A. Avignon, and A. Sultan
Long-Term Outcome and Disability of Diabetic Patients Hospitalized for Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A 6.5-year follow-up study
Diabetes Care, July 1, 2008; 31(7): 1288 - 1292.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
S. Butalia, V. A. Palda, R. J. Sargeant, A. S. Detsky, and O. Mourad
Does This Patient With Diabetes Have Osteomyelitis of the Lower Extremity?
JAMA, February 20, 2008; 299(7): 806 - 813.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Diabetes CareHome page
L. A. Lavery, D. G. Armstrong, E. J.G. Peters, and B. A. Lipsky
Probe-to-Bone Test for Diagnosing Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: Reliable or relic?
Diabetes Care, February 1, 2007; 30(2): 270 - 274.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Diabetes Diabetes Care Clinical Diabetes Diabetes Spectrum
Copyright © 2006 by the American Diabetes Association.