Table 3 Summary of the original IWGDF recommendations compared with the new Australian guideline recommendations for wound classification

1

In a person with diabetes and a foot ulcer, use the SINBAD system for communication among health professionals about the characteristics of the ulcer (strong; moderate)

Adapted

In a person with diabetes and a foot ulcer, as a minimum, use the SINBAD wound classification system for communication among health professionals about the characteristics of the ulcer (strong; moderate)

2

Do not use any of the currently available classification/scoring systems to offer an individual prognosis for a person with diabetes and a foot ulcer (strong; low)

Adapted

Be cautious in the application of any of the currently available classification/scoring systems to offer an individual prognosis for a person with diabetes and a foot ulcer (weak; low)

3

In a person with diabetes and an infected foot ulcer, use the IDSA/IWGDF infection classification to characterise and guide infection management (weak; moderate)

Adopted

As stated in original IWGDF recommendation

4

In a person with diabetes and a foot ulcer who is being managed in a setting where appropriate expertise in vascular intervention is available, use WIfI scoring to aid decision making in the assessment of perfusion and likelihood of benefit from revascularisation (weak; moderate)

Adopted

As stated in original IWGDF recommendation

5

Use the SINBAD system for any regional/national/international audits to allow comparisons between institutions on the outcomes of patients with diabetes and an ulcer of the foot (strong; high)

Adapted

As a minimum, use the SINBAD system for any regional/national/international audits to allow comparisons between institutions on the outcomes of patients with diabetes and an ulcer of the foot (strong; high)