↓ Skip to main content

Ozone therapy for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in this source, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

54 tweeters
1 Facebook page
1 Wikipedia page
1 Google+ user


10 Dimensions

Readers on

44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Ozone therapy for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes
Published by
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, October 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008474.pub2
Pubmed ID

Jian Liu, Peng Zhang, Jing Tian, Lun Li, Jun Li, Jin Hui Tian, KeHu Yang, Liu, Jian, Zhang, Peng, Tian, Jing, Li, Lun, Li, Jun, Tian, Jin Hui, Yang, KeHu


It has been reported that ozone therapy might be helpful in treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus (DM). To assess the effects of ozone therapy on the healing of foot ulcers in people with DM. In March 2015 we searched: The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid EMBASE, EBSCO CINAHL, Science Citation Index, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and The Chinese Clinical Registry. There were no restrictions based on language, date or study setting. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ozone therapy with sham ozone therapy or any other interventions for foot ulcers in people with DM, irrespective of publication date or language. Two reviewers independently screened all retrieved citations, selected relevant citations and extracted data. Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third reviewer. The methodological quality of included studies and the evidence level of outcomes were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach respectively. Data were expressed using risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with their 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Review Manager (RevMan) software was used to analyse the data. Three studies (212 participants) were included in this review. The overall risk of bias was high for two trials and unclear for one.One trial (101 participants) compared ozone treatment with antibiotics for foot ulcers in people with DM. The study had a follow-up period of 20 days. This study showed that ozone treatment was associated with a greater reduction in ulcer area from baseline to the end of the study than treatment with antibiotics (MD -20.54 cm(2), 95% CI -20.61 to -20.47), and a shorter duration of hospitalisation (MD -8.00 days, 95% CI -14.17 to -1.83), but did not appear to affect the number of ulcers healed over 20 days (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.40). No side effects were observed in either group.The other two trials (111 participants) compared ozone treatment plus usual care with usual care for foot ulcers in people with DM. The meta-analysis results did not show evidence of a difference between groups for the outcomes of reduction of ulcer area (MD -2.11 cm(2), 95% CI -5.29 to 1.07), the number of ulcers healed (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.17), adverse events (RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.48 to 10.79), or amputation rate (RR 2.73, 95%CI 0.12, 64.42). The available evidence was three small RCTs with unclear methodology, so we are unable to draw any firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of ozone therapy for foot ulcers in people with DM.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 54 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 43 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 34%
Unspecified 13 30%
Other 12 27%
Student > Bachelor 12 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 23%
Other 36 82%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 105%
Unspecified 16 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 27%
Social Sciences 6 14%
Engineering 3 7%
Other 15 34%