Interventions in the management of infection in the foot in diabetes: a systematic review

MRSA infection, re-infection and clinical outcomes in diabetic foot infections

The aim was to investigate methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) incidence, conversion and outcomes in diabetic foot infections (DFIs). This is a pooled patient-level analysis of combined data sets from two randomised clinical trials including 219 patients admitted to the hospital with moderate or severe DFIs. Intraoperative bone and tissue cultures identified bacterial pathogens. We identified pathogens at index infections and subsequent re-infections. We identified MRSA conversion (MSSA to MRSA) in re-infections. MRSA incidence in index infections was 10.5%, with no difference between soft tissue infections (STIs) and osteomyelitis (OM). MRSA conversion occurred in 7.7% of the re-infections in patients who initially had MSSA in their cultures. Patients with re-infection were 2.2 times more likely to have MRSA compared to the first infection (10.5% vs. 25.8%, relative risk [RR] = 2.2, p = 0.001). Patients with MRSA had longer antibiotic treatment during the 1-year follow-up, compared to other pathogens (other 49.8 ± 34.7 days, MRSA 65.3 ± 41.5 days, p = 0.04). Furthermore, there were no differences in healing, time to heal, length of stay, re-infection, amputation, re-ulceration, re-admission, surgery after discharge and amputation after discharge compared to other pathogens. The incidence of MRSA at the index was 10.5% with no difference in STI and OM. MRSA incidence was 25.8% in re-infections. The RR of having MRSA was 2.2 times higher in re-infections. Patients with MRSA used more antibiotics during the 1-year follow-up. Furthermore, there were no differences in clinical outcomes compared to other bacterial pathogens.

Diabetic Foot Infections in the Emergency Department

Diabetic foot infection (DFI) is among the most common diabetic complications requiring hospitalization. Prompt emergency department diagnosis and evidence-based management can prevent eventual amputation and associated disability and mortality. Underlying neuropathy, arterial occlusion, immune dysfunction, and hyperglycemia-associated dehydration and ketoacidosis can all contribute to severity and conspire to make DFI diagnosis and management difficult. Serious complications include osteomyelitis, necrotizing infection, and sepsis. Practice guidelines are designed to assist frontline providers with correct diagnosis, categorization, and treatment decisions. Management generally includes a careful lower extremity examination and plain x-ray, obtaining appropriate tissue cultures, and evidence-based antibiotic selection tailored to severity.

Evidence-based interventions for identifying candidate quality indicators to assess quality of care in diabetic foot clinics: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes are a serious complication requiring a complex management and have a high societal impact. Quality monitoring systems to optimize diabetic foot care exist, but a formal and more evidence-based approach to develop quality indicators (QIs) is lacking. We aimed to identify a set of candidate indicators for diabetic foot care by adopting an evidence-based methodology.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across four academic databases: PubMed, Embase CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Studies that reported evidence-based interventions related to organization or delivery of diabetic foot care were searched. Data from the eligible studies were summarized and used to formulate process and structure indicators. The evidence for each candidate QI was described in a methodical and transparent manner. The review process was reported according to the "Preferred Reported Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis" (PRISMA) statements and its extension for scoping reviews.

RESULTS

In total, 981 full-text articles were screened, and 322 clinical studies were used to formulate 42 candidate QIs.

CONCLUSIONS

An evidence-based approach could be used to select candidate indicators for diabetic foot ulcer care, relating to the following domains: wound healing interventions, peripheral artery disease, offloading, secondary prevention, and interventions related to organization of care. In a further step, the feasibility of the identified set of indicators will be assessed by a multidisciplinary panel of diabetic foot care stakeholders.

Adjuvant effect of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: A case series

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical evolution of patients with diabetic foot ulcer treated with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) using the Bates-Jensen (BJ) scale. A total of 21 patients were monitored, with an average age of 58 years. Patients underwent the standard treatment protocol of the institution, supplemented with aPDT utilizing 0.01% methylene blue (MB) and laser irradiation (660 nm, 100 mW, 6 J per point). Following aPDT, the lesions were protected with hydrofiber dressings containing silver. The Bates-Jensen Scale was employed at pre-treatment and post-aPDT sessions to assess lesion progression. The results demonstrated a significant difference between pre- and post-treatment values in the overall BJ score. The use of MB in aPDT proved to be an effective, safe, well-tolerated treatment with high patient adherence and the potential for implementation in the care of diabetic foot conditions.

Interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections: A systematic review

The optimal approaches to managing diabetic foot infections remain a challenge for clinicians. Despite an exponential rise in publications investigating different treatment strategies, the various agents studied generally produce comparable results, and high-quality data are scarce. In this systematic review, we searched the medical literature using the PubMed and Embase databases for published studies on the treatment of diabetic foot infections from 30 June 2018 to 30 June 2022. We combined this search with our previous literature search of a systematic review performed in 2020, in which the infection committee of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot searched the literature until June 2018. We defined the context of the literature by formulating clinical questions of interest, then developing structured clinical questions (Patients-Intervention-Control-Outcomes) to address these. We only included data from controlled studies of an intervention to prevent or cure a diabetic foot infection. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and then assessed their relevant outcomes and methodological quality. Our literature search identified a total of 5,418 articles, of which we selected 32 for full-text review. Overall, the newly available studies we identified since 2018 do not significantly modify the body of the 2020 statements for the interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections. The recent data confirm that outcomes in patients treated with the different antibiotic regimens for both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis of the diabetes-related foot are broadly equivalent across studies, with a few exceptions (tigecycline not non-inferior to ertapenem [±vancomycin]). The newly available data suggest that antibiotic therapy following surgical debridement for moderate or severe infections could be reduced to 10 days and to 3 weeks for osteomyelitis following surgical debridement of bone. Similar outcomes were reported in studies comparing primarily surgical and predominantly antibiotic treatment strategies in selected patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to assess the effect of various recent adjunctive therapies, such as cold plasma for infected foot ulcers and bioactive glass for osteomyelitis. Our updated systematic review confirms a trend to a better quality of the most recent trials and the need for further well-designed trials to produce higher quality evidence to underpin our recommendations.

Clinical practice recommendations for infectious disease management of diabetic foot infection (DFI) - 2023 SPILF

In march 2020, the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) published an update of the 2015 guidelines on the diagnosis and management of diabetic foot infection (DFI). While we (the French ID society, SPILF) endorsed some of these recommendations, we wanted to update our own 2006 guidelines and specifically provide informative elements on modalities of microbiological diagnosis and antibiotic treatment (especially first- and second-line regiments, oral switch and duration). The recommendations put forward in the present guidelines are addressed to healthcare professionals managing patients with DFI and more specifically focused on infectious disease management of this type of infection, which clearly needs a multidisciplinary approach. Staging of the severity of the infection is mandatory using the classification drawn up by the IWGDF. Microbiological samples should be taken only in the event of clinical signs suggesting infection in accordance with a strict preliminarily established protocol. Empirical antibiotic therapy should be chosen according to the IWGDF grade of infection and duration of the wound, but must always cover methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. Early reevaluation of the patient is a fundamental step, and duration of antibiotic therapy can be shortened in many situations. When osteomyelitis is suspected, standard foot radiograph is the first-line imagery examination and a bone biopsy should be performed for microbiological documentation. Histological analysis of the bone sample is no longer recommended. High dosages of antibiotics are recommended in cases of confirmed osteomyelitis.

Australian evidence-based guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes-related foot disease: a guideline summary

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) - foot ulcers, infection, ischaemia - is a leading cause of hospitalisation, disability, and health care costs in Australia. The previous 2011 Australian guideline for DFD was outdated. We developed new Australian evidence-based guidelines for DFD by systematically adapting suitable international guidelines to the Australian context using the ADAPTE and GRADE approaches recommended by the NHMRC.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

This article summarises the most relevant of the 98 recommendations made across six new guidelines for the general medical audience, including: prevention - screening, education, self-care, footwear, and treatments to prevent DFD; classification - classifications systems for ulcers, infection, ischaemia and auditing; peripheral artery disease (PAD) - examinations and imaging for diagnosis, severity classification, and treatments; infection - examinations, cultures, imaging and inflammatory markers for diagnosis, severity classification, and treatments; offloading - pressure offloading treatments for different ulcer types and locations; and wound healing - debridement, wound dressing selection principles and wound treatments for non-healing ulcers.

CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THE GUIDELINE

For people without DFD, key changes include using a new risk stratification system for screening, categorising risk and managing people at increased risk of DFD. For those categorised at increased risk of DFD, more specific self-monitoring, footwear prescription, surgical treatments, and activity management practices to prevent DFD have been recommended. For people with DFD, key changes include using new ulcer, infection and PAD classification systems for assessing, documenting and communicating DFD severity. These systems also inform more specific PAD, infection, pressure offloading, and wound healing management recommendations to resolve DFD.

Recent Advances in Functional Wound Dressings

Significance: Nowadays, the wound dressing is no longer limited to its primary wound protection ability. Hydrogel, sponge-like material, three dimensional-printed mesh, and nanofiber-based dressings with incorporation of functional components, such as nanomaterials, growth factors, enzymes, antimicrobial agents, and electronics, are able to not only prevent/treat infection but also accelerate the wound healing and monitor the wound-healing status. Recent Advances: The advances in nanotechnologies and materials science have paved the way to incorporate various functional components into the dressings, which can facilitate wound healing and monitor different biological parameters in the wound area. In this review, we mainly focus on the discussion of recently developed functional wound dressings. Critical Issues: Understanding the structure and composition of wound dressings is important to correlate their functions with the outcome of wound management. Future Directions: "All-in-one" dressings that integrate multiple functions (e.g., monitoring, antimicrobial, pain relief, immune modulation, and regeneration) could be effective for wound repair and regeneration.

Systemic Antimicrobial Therapy for Diabetic Foot Infections: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are a common complication of diabetes; however, there is clinical uncertainty regarding the optimal antimicrobial selection. The aim of this review was to critically evaluate the recent systematic reviews on the efficacy and safety of systemic (parenteral or oral) antimicrobials for DFI. Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases and the PROSPERO register were searched from January 2015 to January 2023. Systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses on systemic antimicrobials for DFI, with outcomes of clinical infection resolution or complications, were included. Of the 413 records identified, 6 systematic reviews of 29 individual studies were included. Heterogeneity of individual studies precluded meta-analysis, except for ertapenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam (RR 1.07, 95% CI [0.96-1.19]) and fluoroquinolones versus piperacillin-tazobactam (RR 1.03, 95% CI [0.89-1.20]) in one review. The application of the AMSTAR-2 tool determined two reviews to be of high quality. There was no statistical difference in the clinical resolution of infections for 24 different antimicrobial regimens (penicillins, cephalosporins, carbapenems, fluoroquinolones, vancomycin, metronidazole, clindamycin, linezolid, daptomycin, and tigecycline). However, tigecycline did not meet non-inferiority against ertapenem ± vancomycin (absolute difference -5.5%, 95% CI [-11.0-0.1]) and was associated with a higher incidence of adverse drug events. There is minimal systematic review evidence to suggest one regimen is superior to another for DFI.

Meta-Analysis: Outcomes of Surgical and Medical Management of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes in the published literature on medical and surgical management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO).

METHODS

A PubMed and Google Scholar search of articles relating to DFO was performed over the dates of January 1931 to January 2020. Articles that involved Charcot arthropathy, case reports, small case series, review articles, commentaries, nonhuman studies, and non-English articles were excluded. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool was used to rate the bias of each study. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects and inverse variance methods. The search yielded 1192 articles. After review and the removal of articles that did not meet inclusion criteria, 28 articles remained. Eighteen articles were related to the medical management of DFO and 13 articles were related to surgical management. Three articles looked at a combination of medical and surgical management and were included in both groups. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran Q, I 2, τ2, and τ.

RESULTS

The average success rate was 68.2% (range, 17.0%-97.3%) for medical treatment and 85.7% (range, 65.0%-98.8%) for surgical and medical treatment. There were significant inconsistencies in accounting for peripheral arterial disease and peripheral neuropathy. There was significant heterogeneity in outcomes between studies. However, there was a high rate of successful treatment and a wide range between patients with medical treatment and combined surgical and medical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional properly designed prospective studies with gold-standard references for diagnosing osteomyelitis are needed to help determine whether medical management of DFO can be successful without surgical intervention.

Negative pressure wound therapy, artificial skin and autogenous skin implantation in diabetic foot ulcers

OBJECTIVE

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are one of the most serious diabetic consequences, leading to amputations. Various therapies have been used to treat DFUs; however, a combination of negative pressure suction, artificial skin and autogenous skin implantation have never been investigated. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a novel three-step therapy protocol using negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), artificial skin and autogenous skin implantation in patients with DFUs.

METHOD

At a single tertiary university hospital between 2015 and 2018, the three-step therapy protocol was applied to patients with DFUs and its safety and efficacy was investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 21 patients took part in the study. The majority of the patients were female (62%), with a mean age of 65 years and a mean body mass index of 21kg/m². A third (n=7) of operative sites experienced minor complications, with two requiring re-operation. At a median follow up of 24 months, the average time of complete wound healing was 46 days, and the wound healing rate was 71%. The first-stage wound healing rate was 90%. All patients had achieved remission without any further recurrence of disease.

CONCLUSION

This comprehensive surgical technique for managing DFUs achieved a high local cure rate, minimal functional morbidity, and acceptable wound complication rates. The three-step therapy protocol has the potential to promote the healing process of DFUs, which is expected to serve as a new method for the treatment and cure of DFUs.

Photobiomodulation at 830 nm Stimulates Migration, Survival and Proliferation of Fibroblast Cells

PURPOSE

Photobiomodulation (PBM) promotes diabetic wound healing by favoring cell survival and proliferation. This study aimed to investigate the potential of PBM in stimulating cellular migration, viability, and proliferation using the transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1)/Smad signaling pathway.

METHODS

The study explored the in vitro effects of near infrared (NIR) light on cell viability (survival) and proliferation as well as the presence of TGF-β1, phosphorylated TGF-β receptor type I (pTGF-βR1) and phosphorylated mothers against decapentaplegic-homolog (Smad)-2/3 (p-Smad2/3) in different fibroblast cell models.

RESULTS

Results show a significant increase in cellular migration in wounded models, and increased viability and proliferation in irradiated cells compared to their respective controls. An increase in the presence of TGF-β1 in the culture media, a reduction in pTGF-βR1 and a slight presence of p-Smad2/3 was observed in the cells.

CONCLUSION

These findings show that PBM at 830 nm using a fluence of 5 J/cm² could induce cell viability, migration and proliferation to favor successful healing of diabetic wounds. This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge on the molecular and cellular effect of PBM and showcases the suitability of PBM at 830 nm in managing diabetic wounds.

Surface Design for Antibacterial Materials: From Fundamentals to Advanced Strategies

Healthcare-acquired infections as well as increasing antimicrobial resistance have become an urgent global challenge, thus smart alternative solutions are needed to tackle bacterial infections. Antibacterial materials in biomedical applications and hospital hygiene have attracted great interest, in particular, the emergence of surface design strategies offer an effective alternative to antibiotics, thereby preventing the possible development of bacterial resistance. In this review, recent progress on advanced surface modifications to prevent bacterial infections are addressed comprehensively, starting with the key factors against bacterial adhesion, followed by varying strategies that can inhibit biofilm formation effectively. Furthermore, "super antibacterial systems" through pre-treatment defense and targeted bactericidal system, are proposed with increasing evidence of clinical potential. Finally, the advantages and future challenges of surface strategies to resist healthcare-associated infections are discussed, with promising prospects of developing novel antimicrobial materials.

Advances in pharmacotherapy for diabetic foot osteomyelitis

Introduction: The diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually clinical. Its severity is related to the location and depth of the lesion, and the presence of necrosis or gangrene. The aetiology of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually polymicrobial, and DFO is often associated with chronic or recurring ulceration.Areas covered: We built on the  International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidelines on the management of diabetic foot infection, providing an outline of the current and new concepts in pharmacotherapy in DFO. We assess future strategies in both medical, surgical and combination management of DFO.Expert opinion: Surgical removal of infected bone is considered as the standard treatment, but a medical approach of certain selected situations has now proven efficacy in selected patients. The combination of new modalities in local antibiotic delivery may provide better long-term solutions and more lasting remission and avoid the disadvantages of prolonged systemic antibiotics.

Surgical management of the acute severely infected diabetic foot - The 'infected diabetic foot attack'. An instructional review

Diabetic Foot Infection (DFI), in its severest form the acute infected 'diabetic foot attack', is a limb and life threatening condition if untreated. Acute infection may lead to tissue necrosis and rapid spread through tissue planes, in the patient with poorly controlled diabetes facilitated by the host status. A combination of soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis may co-exist, in particular if chronic osteomyelitis serves as a persistent source for recurrence of soft tissue infection. This "diabetic foot attack" is characterised by acutely spreading infection and substantial soft tissue necrosis. In the presence of ulceration, the condition is classified by the Infectious Diseases Society of America/International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IDSA/IWGDF Class 3 or 4) presentation requiring an urgent surgical intervention by radical debridement of the infection. Thus, 'time is tissue', referring to tissue salvage and maximal limb preservation. Emergent treatment is important for limb salvage and may be life-saving. We provide a narrative current treatment practices in managing severe DFI with severe soft tissue and osseous infection. We address the role of surgery and its adjuvants, the long term outcomes, potential complications and possible future treatment strategies.

Treating Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: A Practical State-of-the-Art Update

Background and Objectives: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) can be difficult to treat and securing optimal clinical outcomes requires a multidisciplinary approach involving a wide variety of medical, surgical and other health care professionals, as well as the patient. Results of studies conducted in the past few years have allowed experts to formulate guidelines that can improve clinical outcomes. Material and Methods: We conducted a narrative review of the literature on treat- ment of DFO, with an emphasis on studies published in the last two years, especially regarding antimicrobial therapies and surgical approached to treatment of DFO, supplemented by our own extensive clinical and research experience in this field. Results: Major amputations were once com- mon for DFO but, with improved diagnostic and surgical techniques, "conservative" surgery (foot- sparing, resecting only the infected and necrotic bone) is becoming commonplace, especially for forefoot infections. Traditional antibiotic therapy, which has been administered predominantly in- travenously and frequently for several months, can often be replaced by appropriately selected oral antibiotic regimens following only a brief (or even no) parenteral therapy, and given for no more than 6 weeks. Based on ongoing studies, the recommended duration of treatment may soon be even shorter, especially for cases in which a substantial portion of the infected bone has been resected. Using the results of cultures (preferably of bone specimens) and antimicrobial stewardship princi- ples allows clinicians to select evidence-based antibiotic regimens, often of a limited pathogen spec- trum. Intra-osseous antimicrobial and surgical approaches to treatment are also evolving in light of ongoing research. Conclusions: In this narrative, evidenced-based review, taking consideration of principles of antimicrobial stewardship and good surgical practice, we have highlighted the recent literature and offered practical, state-of-the-art advice on the antibiotic and surgical management of DFO.

Negative pressure wound therapy in grade 1 and 2 diabetic foot ulcers: A randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Foot ulcers are one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality among diabetics in India. Early diagnosis and timely management is vital in preventing the progression of the disease which may require amputation. Conventional methods take a long time for healing. This study aims to compare negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and conventional saline dressings in diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) healing.

METHODS

This prospective randomized study was conducted in 45 patients with grade 1 and 2 DFUs. 22 patients in group A received NPWT and 23 patients in group B received saline dressings. The formation of granulation tissue, reduction in ulcer size, duration of hospital stay and time for complete healing of wounds were assessed.

RESULTS

The formation of granulation tissue (91.14 vs 52.61%, p < 0.001) and reduction in ulcer size (40.78 vs 21.18%, p = 0.008) at 14 days was significantly more in group A. The duration of hospital stay (15.68 vs 29.00 days, p < 0.001) and time for 100% coverage of the wound with granulation tissue (14.82 ± 7.30 vs 44.57 ± 7.11 days, p < 0.001) was significantly less in group A. Complete healing of wounds at 3 months was observed in 20 patients (90.9%) in group A and 6 patients (26.1%) in group B (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

In our study NPWT led to early reduction in ulcer size, more granulation tissue formation, shorter hospital stay and complete wound healing. In lower and middle income countries like India with high prevalence of DFUs, early recovery is a boon to the patients to resume their daily activities.

Impact of dedicated infectious disease teamwork on the treatment and prognosis of patients with diabetic foot infection

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to develop and evaluate the impact of a new model in which the infectious disease (ID) physician and pharmacist work together to treat diabetic foot infections (DFIs).

METHODS

A quasi-experimental before-after study was conducted. The medical charts of inpatients with DFI admitted between April 1, 2017 and March 31, 2018 were reviewed retrospectively (control group, n = 30). Inpatients diagnosed with DFI between April 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019 were enrolled prospectively as the intervention group and received treatment through dedicated ID teamwork (intervention group, n = 35).

RESULTS

The distribution of infection severity and levels of metabolic criteria were similar in the two groups. Compared with the control group, the intervention group received adequate initial empirical treatment more frequently (96.8% vs 43.5%, p < 0.001) and had a shorter median duration of fever (1 day vs 7.5 days, p < 0.001). Rates of healing and relapse within 6 months were similar in the two groups, although the intervention group showed more sites of osteomyelitis (p = 0.036) and a higher percentage of polymicrobial infections (48.6% vs 10.0%, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The early and full participation of ID physicians and pharmacists in the treatment of DFI facilitated targeted antimicrobial treatment and improved patient outcomes.

Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. This guideline is on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes and updates the 2015 IWGDF infection guideline. On the basis of patient, intervention, comparison, outcomes (PICOs) developed by the infection committee, in conjunction with internal and external reviewers and consultants, and on systematic reviews the committee conducted on the diagnosis of infection (new) and treatment of infection (updated from 2015), we offer 27 recommendations. These cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infection, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Of note, we have updated this scheme for the first time since we developed it 15 years ago. We also review the microbiology of diabetic foot infections, including how to collect samples and to process them to identify causative pathogens. Finally, we discuss the approach to treating diabetic foot infections, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and for bone infections, when and how to approach surgical treatment, and which adjunctive treatments we think are or are not useful for the infectious aspects of diabetic foot problems. For this version of the guideline, we also updated four tables and one figure from the 2016 guideline. We think that following the principles of diagnosing and treating diabetic foot infections outlined in this guideline can help clinicians to provide better care for these patients.