Core High-Risk Foot Profiles and Surgery-Coded Care-Intensity Indicators Among Hajj Pilgrims Presenting with Foot and Ankle Conditions: A Presentation-Level Analysis

Background/Objectives: Foot and ankle presentations during Hajj occur in a dense mass-gathering environment where prolonged walking, heat exposure, crowding, variable footwear, and limited self-care can interact with chronic disease and wound vulnerability. Previous Hajj studies have described foot injuries and diabetes-related complications, but less is known about whether simple high-risk foot documentation flags identify presentation records with higher care-pathway intensity. The primary objective was to estimate the presentation-level burden of core high-risk foot profiles among pilgrims presenting with foot and ankle conditions during Hajj 2025. Secondary objectives were to evaluate associations with a surgery-coded care-intensity indicator, hospital referral, and component heterogeneity. Methods: This observational presentation-level analysis included 3957 foot and ankle presentation records. The unit of analysis was the presentation/case record, not a unique individual pilgrim. A core high-risk foot profile was defined as diabetes, neuropathy, diabetic foot ulcer, foot ulcer, complications of open wound, or osteomyelitis. The primary outcome was a surgery-coded care-intensity indicator, defined solely from treatment documentation containing “Surgery” and interpreted as a care-pathway proxy rather than confirmed operating-room surgery. Logistic regression estimated crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs); exploratory risk-category analyses assessed heterogeneity within the composite profile. Results: Core high-risk foot profiles were identified in 1793/3957 presentations (45.3%). The primary outcome occurred in 239/1793 high-risk presentations (13.3%) and 201/2164 non-high-risk presentations (9.3%), an absolute difference of 4.0 percentage points. The crude OR was 1.50 (95% CI 1.23–1.83; p < 0.001). The association persisted in the primary adjusted model (adjusted OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.20–1.79; p < 0.001) and in the extended clinical sensitivity model (adjusted OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.20–1.80; p < 0.001). Care pathways and secondary outcomes are summarized was also more frequent in high-risk presentations (12.2% vs. 9.8%; crude OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.05–1.57; p = 0.017). Exploratory category analysis showed that chronic-risk-only presentations had a primary outcome rate similar to non-high-risk presentations (9.0% vs. 9.3%), whereas ulcer/wound/deep-infection presentations had a higher rate (17.3%; crude OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.63–2.55; p < 0.001). Model discrimination was modest (C-statistics 0.55–0.64). Conclusions: Core high-risk foot flags were common among Hajj foot and ankle presentation records and were associated with surgery-coded care-intensity and referral documentation. However, the composite was clinically heterogeneous, the outcome was not a validated surgery endpoint, and the models were not prediction tools. These findings support cautious use of high-risk foot flags as operational prompts for assessment and pathway planning rather than as standalone clinical risk estimates.