Background: The use of antibiotics in diabetic foot ulcer infections (DFUI) is essential in reducing morbidity. Optimal administration of antibiotics can improve clinical outcomes and reduce the risk of antibiotic resistance. This study aims to review the efficacy, in terms of clinical cure, of various regimens and the duration of antibiotic administration in DFUI patients, based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The efficacy based on microbiological response is also reviewed as the secondary outcome. Materials and Methods: We used three databases, namely PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect, to search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with DFUI who required antibiotics. Results: A total of 16 studies were included in the systematic review. The study locations and bacterial patterns varied, with the most common pathogen being Staphylococcus aureus. Most studies did not demonstrate a significant difference in clinical cure and pathogen eradication, either in the comparison between systemic and topical antibiotics or in the duration of administration. Some studies had similar characteristics and were analyzed to conclude. These studies showed that ertapenem had comparable efficacy to piperacillin/tazobactam. Similar results were also conducted from studies of piperacillin-+amoxicillinclavulanic acid vs. moxifloxacin. Conclusion Most studies have heterogeneous characteristics, possibly due to differences in research location. Therefore, there is no strong evidence to recommend a specific antibiotic with the highest efficacy. However, since all included studies are RCTs, this review provides a good summary in considering antibiotic choices when treating DFUI patients.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to develop a valid and reliable instrument for assessing patients’ behavior toward the risk of hypoglycemia through self-assessment. Insufficient education and supervision of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) outpatients by healthcare providers is a significant concern, affecting their behavior during the treatment process. Additionally, inappropriate behavior typically increases the risk of hypoglycemia. To mitigate this risk, several studies have recommended evaluating patients’ behavior, necessitating the development of a new instrument. Methods: The study procedures were conducted in 3 stages: instrument development (face and content validity, stage I), construct validity and reliability test (stage II), and criterion validity (stage III). Stage I involved 5 healthcare practitioners, including internal medicine doctors, nurses, dietitians, and pharmacists in hospitals and community health centers. Stage II included 20 respondents using a 1-shot test method. Stage III involved 237 type 2 DM outpatients at Central General Hospital (RSUP) in Jakarta, employing a cross-sectional design and consecutive sampling. Results: The results indicated that the developed instrument was valid and reliable, comprising 9 domains (29 questions). These domains included behavior toward blood glucose monitoring, diet, physical activity, medication, assistance from healthcare providers, hypoglycemia management, self-care, family support, and insulin use. Furthermore, poor behavior was found to increase the risk of hypoglycemia by 2.36 times. Conclusions Based on these results, the developed instrument could be effectively used to evaluate behavior toward hypoglycemia among type 2 DM outpatients, confirming its validity and reliability.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to develop a valid and reliable instrument for assessing patients’ behavior toward the risk of hypoglycemia through self-assessment. Insufficient education and supervision of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) outpatients by healthcare providers is a significant concern, affecting their behavior during the treatment process. Additionally, inappropriate behavior typically increases the risk of hypoglycemia. To mitigate this risk, several studies have recommended evaluating patients’ behavior, necessitating the development of a new instrument. Methods: The study procedures were conducted in 3 stages: instrument development (face and content validity, stage I), construct validity and reliability test (stage II), and criterion validity (stage III). Stage I involved 5 healthcare practitioners, including internal medicine doctors, nurses, dietitians, and pharmacists in hospitals and community health centers. Stage II included 20 respondents using a 1-shot test method. Stage III involved 237 type 2 DM outpatients at Central General Hospital (RSUP) in Jakarta, employing a cross-sectional design and consecutive sampling. Results: The results indicated that the developed instrument was valid and reliable, comprising 9 domains (29 questions). These domains included behavior toward blood glucose monitoring, diet, physical activity, medication, assistance from healthcare providers, hypoglycemia management, self-care, family support, and insulin use. Furthermore, poor behavior was found to increase the risk of hypoglycemia by 2.36 times. Conclusions Based on these results, the developed instrument could be effectively used to evaluate behavior toward hypoglycemia among type 2 DM outpatients, confirming its validity and reliability.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to develop a valid and reliable instrument for assessing patients’ behavior toward the risk of hypoglycemia through self-assessment. Insufficient education and supervision of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) outpatients by healthcare providers is a significant concern, affecting their behavior during the treatment process. Additionally, inappropriate behavior typically increases the risk of hypoglycemia. To mitigate this risk, several studies have recommended evaluating patients’ behavior, necessitating the development of a new instrument. Methods: The study procedures were conducted in 3 stages: instrument development (face and content validity, stage I), construct validity and reliability test (stage II), and criterion validity (stage III). Stage I involved 5 healthcare practitioners, including internal medicine doctors, nurses, dietitians, and pharmacists in hospitals and community health centers. Stage II included 20 respondents using a 1-shot test method. Stage III involved 237 type 2 DM outpatients at Central General Hospital (RSUP) in Jakarta, employing a cross-sectional design and consecutive sampling. Results: The results indicated that the developed instrument was valid and reliable, comprising 9 domains (29 questions). These domains included behavior toward blood glucose monitoring, diet, physical activity, medication, assistance from healthcare providers, hypoglycemia management, self-care, family support, and insulin use. Furthermore, poor behavior was found to increase the risk of hypoglycemia by 2.36 times. Conclusions Based on these results, the developed instrument could be effectively used to evaluate behavior toward hypoglycemia among type 2 DM outpatients, confirming its validity and reliability.