Feet in Peril: Assessment of Feet in Patients Undergoing Haemodialysis.

The study was done in one haemodialysis unit, so the results may not apply to other units or countries. The sample was small and used convenience sampling, and patients with foot amputations were excluded, which may understate the true burden of foot problems. The design was retrospective and cross-sectional, with only one initial podiatric assessment and no follow-up, so it cannot show cause, change over time, or whether care prevented complications. The analysis did not adjust for age, diabetes, hypertension, or other factors together, so the reported associations may be mixed up with each other. No biochemical measures such as urea, phosphorus, Kt/V, or urea reduction rate were collected, so possible physiological explanations for dryness and wounds were not examined. All patients had an additional chronic disease, so it does not describe haemodialysis patients without comorbidities. The foot assessment form was a hospital standard form, not a validated podiatric tool, so the findings may depend on non-standardised recording.

The funding declaration does not name a sponsor, and the supplied text gives no author conflict disclosures.

Do not conclude that routine nurse-led foot screening or education prevents ulcers or amputations based on this paper. It is a single-centre descriptive study with no longitudinal follow-up and no multivariate adjustment, so it shows what was present at one assessment, not that care changed outcomes.