Retrospective Study of Glycemic Control Following Transition from the Intensive Care Unit in A National Sample of U.S. Hospitals

Objective: Retrospective study to evaluate glycemic control outcomes after transition from the intensive care unit (ICU) to a non-ICU area in a national sample of U.S. hospitals.Methods: Mean point-of-care blood glucose (POC-BG) data were assessed overall and at 24 hours before and up to 72 hours after the transition. Comparisons in glucose variability (standard deviation of POC-BG data) were assessed. Impact on glycemic control was evaluated after accounting for hospital characteristics through logistic regression analysis.Results: POC-BG data were obtained from 576 hospitals. Overall mean (SD) POC-BG values in ICU versus non-ICU areas were 176 (24) versus 169 (21) mg/dL (P<.01). Mean (SD) of the ICU POC-BG data were 76 (16) versus 73 (16) mg/dL in the non-ICU data (P<.01). However, when comparing values of POC-BG in the last 24-hour ICU period with those from up to 72 hours posttransition, we found no differences, indicative of overall stable glycemic control and variability after transition. Any deterioration of glucose control following the transition was significantly associated with hospital size (P<.01): the smallest hospitals had the highest percentage of these cases. In addition, geographic region showed significant variability (P = .04), with hospitals in the Midwest and West having the highest proportion of cases in which glycemic control worsened following the transition.Conclusion: Glycemic control and variability did not change after transition from the ICU, but outcomes may depend on certain hospital characteristics. Inpatient glycemic control assessment should move beyond just cross-sectional studies and consider the impact of transitioning across inpatient areas. Other statistical approaches to studying this question should be evaluated.Abbreviations: DM = diabetes mellitus ICU = intensive care unit POC-BG = point-of-care blood glucose     

Benchmarking Glycemic Control In U.S. Hospitals

ObjectiveReport data on glucose control from 635 U.S. hospitals.MethodsPoint-of-care blood glucose (POC-BG) test data from January through December 2012 from 635 facilities were extracted. Glucose control was evaluated using patient-day–weighted mean POC-BG values. We calculated hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia rates, stratified by presence or absence of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and we evaluated the relationship between glycemic control and hospital characteristics.ResultsIn total, 51,375,764 POC-BG measurements (non-ICU, 39,197,762; ICU, 12,178,002) from 2,612,966 patients (non-ICU, 2,415,209; ICU, 575,084) were analyzed. The mean POC-BG was 167 mg/dL for non-ICU patients and 170 mg/dL for ICU patients. The prevalence of hyperglycemia (defined as glucose value > 180 mg/dL) was 32.3 and 28.2% in non-ICU and ICU patients, respectively. The prevalence of hypoglycemia (defined as glucose value < 70 mg/dL) was 6.1 and 5.6% in non-ICU and ICU patients, respectively. In non-ICU and ICU settings, the patient-day–weighted mean glucose was highest in the smallest hospitals, in rural hospitals, and in hospitals located in the Northeast (all P < .01). For non-ICU patients, we observed a significant difference in the percentage of patient days with hypoglycemia by geographic region only (P < .001). In ICU patients, the prevalence of hypoglycemia varied significantly by hospital type (P < .03) and geographic region (P < .01).ConclusionIn this largest POC-BG data set analysis conducted to date, glycemic control varied according to hospital characteristics. Our findings remain consistent with previous reports. Among other variables, national benchmarking of inpatient glucose data will need to consider differences in hospital characteristics. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20:876-883)     

Update on Inpatient Glycemic Control in Hospitals in the United States

ObjectiveTo provide data on glucose control in hospitals in the United States, analyzing measurements from the largest number of facilities to date.MethodsPoint-of-care bedside glucose (POC-BG) test results were extracted from 575 hospitals from January 2009 to December 2009 by using a laboratory information management system. Glycemic control for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU areas was assessed by calculating patient-day-weighted mean POC-BG values and rates of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia. The relationship between POC-BG levels and hospital characteristics was determined.ResultsA total of 49,191,313 POC-BG measurements (12,176,299 ICU and 37,015,014 non-ICU values) were obtained from 3,484,795 inpatients (653,359 in the ICU and 2,831,436 in non-ICU areas). The mean POC-BG was 167 mg/dL for ICU patients and 166 mg/dL for nonICU patients. The prevalence of hyperglycemia (> 180 mg/ dL) was 32.2% of patient-days for ICU patients and 32.0% of patient-days for non-ICU patients. The prevalence of hypoglycemia (< 70 mg/dL) was 6.3% of patient-days for ICU patients and 5.7% of patient-days for non-ICU patients. Patient-day-weighted mean POC-BG levels varied on the basis of hospital size (P < .01), type (P < .01), and geographic location (P < .01) for ICU and non-ICU patients, with larger hospitals (≥ 400 beds), academic hospitals, and US hospitals in the West having the lowest mean POC-BG values. The percentage of patient-days in the ICU characterized by hypoglycemia was highest among larger and academic hospitals (P < .05) and least among hospitals in the Northeast (P < .001).ConclusionHyperglycemia is common in hospitals in the United States, and glycemic control may vary on the basis of hospital characteristics. Increased hospital participation in data collection may support a national benchmarking process for the development of optimal practices to manage inpatient hyperglycemia. (Endocr Pract. 2011;17:853-861)     

Is There A “July Effect” for Inpatient Glycemic Control?

ObjectiveThe period of resident turnover in teaching hospitals is considered by some to worsen health outcomes and is called the “July effect.” We sought to study glycemic control in patients admitted to medical floors and identify any adverse outcomes related to a “July effect.”MethodsThis was a single-center retrospective cohort study that compared inpatient glycemic control at the start and end of a single academic year (July 2009 to June 2010). A total of 108 patients with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus were included in the first group (Group 1: July to September 2009), and 134 were in the second group (Group 2: April to June 2010). Four capillary blood glucose measurements were taken from Days 2 to 6 of hospitalization, and clinical data pertinent to glycemic management were collected.ResultsData analysis showed no significant difference in the overall inpatient glycemic control between the 2 groups. The mean glucose levels were 168.67 mg/dL and 168.59 mg/dL for Groups 1 and 2, respectively. Overall, 67% of patients in Group 1 and 72.9% in Group 2 were within a blood glucose range of 70 to 179 mg/dL, and 32% of patients in Group 1 and 44.1% of patients in Group 2 were within the range of 140 to 179 mg/dL. Hypoglycemia occurred in 17% and 18.6% of Groups 1 and 2, respectively. No difference in diabetes treatment ordering practices of residents was detected.ConclusionThis study did not show any evidence to support the “July effect” on overall inpatient glycemic control. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20:919-924)     

Safety and Efficacy of an Insulin Infusion Protocol Designed for the Non-Intensive Care Setting

ObjectiveTo determine whether glycemic control can be safely achieved with use of a simplified insulin infusion protocol in hospitalized patients who are not in the intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsWe developed a novel intravenous insulin protocol specifically designed for use in the non-ICU setting. We then collected clinical data on the first 30 patients treated with use of this protocol. Our study focused on safety and glycemic control.ResultsThe insulin infusion protocol was used in 30 patients for a total of 634 hours. A single hypoglycemic episode (glucose level < 60 mg/dL) occurred in 3 patients. The target mean glucose level of < 150 mg/dL was achieved in 9 hours. Once the glucose target had been achieved, the mean and median glucose concentrations were 156 mg/dL and 140 mg/dL, respectively.ConclusionUse of a simple intravenous insulin protocol can safely and effectively control the blood glucose level in patients in a non-ICU setting. (Endocr Pract. 2009;15:682-688)     

Characterizing Glucose Changes Antecedent to Hypoglycemic Events in the Intensive Care Unit

ObjectiveTo determine whether patterns of glucose changes before hypoglycemia vary according to the severity of the event.MethodsIn this retrospective analysis, point-ofcare blood glucose (POC-BG) data were obtained from the intensive care units (ICUs) of a convenience sample of hospitals that responded to a survey on inpatient diabetes management quality improvement initiatives. To evaluate POC-BG levels before hypoglycemic events, data from patients who experienced hypoglycemia during their time in the ICU were examined, and their glucose changes were assessed against a comparison group of patients who achieved a glycemic range of 80 to 110 mg/dL without ever experiencing hypoglycemia. Absolute glucose decrease, glucose rate of change, and glucose variability before hypoglycemic events (< 40, 40-49, 50-59, and 60-69 mg/ dL) were calculated.ResultsA total of 128 419 POC-BG measurements from 2942 patients in 89 ICUs were analyzed. Patients who experienced the most severe hypoglycemic episodes had the largest absolute drop in their glucose levels before the event (P < .001). The glucose rate of change before a hypoglycemic event increased with worsening hypoglycemia: mean (± standard deviation) glucose rate of change was-1.69 (± 2.98) mg/dL per min before an episode with glucose values less than 40 mg/dL, -0.56 (± 2.65) mg/dL per min before an episode with glucose values 60 to 69 mg/dL, but only -0.39 (± 0.70) for patients who attained a glucose range of 80 to 110 mg/dL without hypoglycemia (P < .001). Glucose variability before an event progressively increased with worsening biochemical hypoglycemia and was least among patients achieving glucose concentrations in the 80 to 110-mg/dL range without hypoglycemia (P < .001).ConclusionsAntecedent glucose change and variability were greater for patients who experienced hypoglycemia. If monitored, these patterns could potentially alert clinicians and help them take preventive measures. Further examination of how these parameters interact with other predisposing risk factors for hypoglycemia is warranted. (Endocr Pract. 2012;18:317-324)     

The Association of Diabetes and Hyperglycemia on Inpatient Readmissions

ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between inpatient glycemic control and readmission in individuals with diabetes and hyperglycemia (DM/HG).MethodsTwo data sets were analyzed from fiscal years 2011 to 2013: hospital data using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes for DM/HG and point of care (POC) glucose monitoring. The variables analyzed included gender, age, mean, minimum and maximum glucose, along with 4 measures of glycemic variability (GV), standard deviation, coefficient of variation, mean amplitude of glucose excursions, and average daily risk range.ResultsOf 66 518 discharges in FY 2011-2013, 28.4% had DM/HG based on ICD-9 codes and 53% received POC monitoring. The overall readmission rate was 13.9%, although the rates for individuals with DM/HG were higher at 18.9% and 20.6% using ICD-9 codes and POC data, respectively. The readmitted group had higher mean glucose (169 ± 47 mg/dL vs 158 ± 46 mg/dL, P < .001). Individuals with severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia had the highest readmission rates. All 4 GV measures were consistent and higher in the readmitted group.ConclusionIndividuals with DM/HG have higher 30-day readmission rates than those without. Those readmitted had higher mean glucose, more extreme glucose values, and higher GV. To our knowledge, this is the first report of multiple metrics of inpatient glycemic control, including GV, and their associations with readmission.     

Management Of hyperglycemia in the non-intensive care patient: featuring subcutaneous insulin protocols

ObjectiveTo provide insulin protocols and adjustment guidance for management of hyperglycemia in common inpatient clinical scenarios.MethodsWe performed a PubMed search of pertinent existing literature published between 1980 and 2010.ResultsHyperglycemia is frequently encountered in general medical and surgical wards and has been linked to adverse clinical outcomes, prolonged hospital length of stay, and increased institutional care needs after discharge. No randomized controlled trial has been conducted to define optimal glycemic goals or to investigate the effects of intensive glycemic control in the non-intensive care unit (ICU) setting. Nonetheless, it is advocated by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American Diabetes Association, in their 2009 Consensus Statement on Inpatient Glycemic Control, that optimization of glycemia in hospitalized patients with diabetes and hyperglycemia be judiciously offered. This approach is clinically sound, in light of the known deleterious consequences of hyperglycemia in critically and noncritically ill patients and the benefits observed with improved glycemic control in intensive care settings. The approach to hyperglycemiain non-ICU inpatients should follow the principles of provision of basal-nutritional-supplemental insulin. Herein we provide insulin protocols and adjustment guidance for management of hyperglycemia in common clinical scenarios. Recommendations reflect the opinion of national experts in the field and our departmental consensus at Penn State Institute for Diabetes and Obesity.ConclusionGlycemic control in the non-ICU setting is a relevant clinical situation that should be addressed and managed effectively and prudently. We present a practical guide for management of hyperglycemia individualized to various clinical scenarios encountered in the general hospital wards. (Endocr Pract. 2011;17:249-260)     

Diabetes and Hyperglycemia Quality Improvement Efforts in Hospitals in the United States: Current Status,Practice Variation,and Barriers to Implementation

ObjectiveTo determine the status of diabetes and hyperglycemia quality improvement efforts in hospitals in the United States.MethodsWe designed and administered a survey to a convenience sample of hospitals, and the responses were analyzed statistically.ResultsWe received 269 responses from 1,151 requested surveys. The sample was similar to hospitals in the United States on the basis of hospital type and geographic region (P = no significant difference) but not on the basis of number of beds (P < .001). Among responding hospitals, 39%, 21%, and 15% had fully implemented inpatient diabetes and hyperglycemia quality improvement programs for critically ill, non-critically ill, and perioperative patients, respectively. Moreover, 77%, 44%, and 49% had fully implemented protocols for hypoglycemia, hyperglycemic crises, and diabetic ketoacidosis, respectively. Variations in glucose target ranges were noted. The responding hospitals had no standard biochemical definition of hypoglycemia; 47% defined hypoglycemia as a glucose level ≤ 70 mg/dL, but 29%, 8%, 6%, and 4% used < 60, ≤ce:hsp sp="0.10"/>50, < 40, and < 80 mg/dL, respectively. Almost a third of reporting hospitals had no metric to track the quality of inpatient diabetes and hyperglycemia care. More than half (59%) indicated that they did not have an automated capability to extract and analyze glucose data. The most frequent barrier to implementing a glycemic control program was concern regarding hypoglycemia (61%).ConclusionHospitals are addressing the issue of inpatient diabetes and glycemic control but face obstacles to implementation of quality improvement programs and vary in their approach to management. Improving the consistency of glucose control practices within hospitals in the United States should help enhance patient care and safety. Future efforts to help hospitals overcome barriers to introducing glucose control programs could include developing standardized glycemic control metrics, improving data collection and reporting methods, and providing improved tools that enable clinicians to control glucose safely. (Endocr Pract. 2010;16:219-230)     

Impact of a Hypoglycemia Reduction Bundle and a Systems Approach to Inpatient Glycemic Management

Objective: Uncontrolled hyperglycemia and iatrogenic hypoglycemia represent common and frequently preventable quality and safety issues. We sought to demonstrate the effectiveness of a hypoglycemia reduction bundle, proactive surveillance of glycemic outliers, and an interdisciplinary data-driven approach to glycemic management.Methods: Population: all hospitalized adult non–intensive care unit (non-ICU) patients with hyperglycemia and/or a diagnosis of diabetes admitted to our 550-bed academic center across 5 calendar years (CYs). Interventions: hypoglycemia reduction bundle targeting most common remediable contributors to iatrogenic hypoglycemia; clinical decision support in standardized order sets and glucose management pages; measure-vention (daily measurement of glycemic outliers with concurrent intervention by the inpatient diabetes team); educational programs. Measures and analysis: Pearson chi-square value with relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to compare glycemic control, hypoglycemia, and hypoglycemia management parameters across the baseline time period (TP1, CY 2009–2010), transitional (TP2, CY 2011–2012), and mature postintervention phase (TP3, CY 2013). Hypoglycemia defined as blood glucose <70 mg/dL, severe hypoglycemia as <40 mg/dL, and severe hyperglycemia >299 mg/dL.Results: A total of 22,990 non-ICU patients, representing 94,900 patient-days of observation were included over the 5-year study. The RR TP3:TP1 for glycemic excursions was reduced significantly: hypoglycemic stay, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.65 to 0.79); severe hypoglycemic stay, 0.44 (95% CI, 0.34 to 0.58); recurrent hypoglycemic day during stay, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.94); severe hypoglycemic day, 0.48 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.62); severe hyperglycemic day (>299 mg/dL), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.80).Conclusion: Hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia event rates were both improved, with the most marked effect on severe hypoglycemic events. Most of these interventions should be portable to other hospitals.Abbreviations: BG = blood glucose CDS = clinical decision support CI = confidence interval CY = calendar year DIG = diabetes initiative group EHR = electronic health record ICU = intensive care unit RR = relative risk SHM = Society of Hospital Medicine TP = time period     

Computerized Physician Order Entry- Based Hyperglycemia Inpatient Protocol and Glycemic Outcomes: The CPOE-HIP Study

ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of implementing a computerized physician order entry (CPOE)-based hyperglycemia inpatient protocol (HIP) on glycemic outcomes.MethodsThis retrospective, cross-sectional study compared blood glucose values, hemoglobin A_1c values, diabetes medication profiles, and demographic data of diabetic patients admitted to medicine services between March 15, 2006, and April 11, 2006 (before CPOE-HIP protocol was adopted), with data of diabetic patients admitted between October 3, 2007, and October 30, 2007 (1 year after CPOE-HIP protocol was implemented).ResultsA total of 241 diabetic patients comprised the pre-CPOE-HIP group and 197 patients comprised the post-CPOE-HIP group. After the protocol was adopted, there was a decrease of 10.8 mg/dL in the mean glucose concentration per patient-day (175.5 ± 81.2 mg/dL vs 164.7 ± 82 mg/dL, P < .001). Additional glycemic control improvements included a 5% increase in patient-days with serum glucose concentrations between 70 and 150 mg/ dL (41.1% vs 46.1%, P = .008) and a 3.1% decrease in patient-days with glucose concentrations above 299 mg/dL (16.9% vs 13.8%, P = .023). The percentage of patientdays with glucose concentrations less than or equal to 50 mg/dL was not significantly different (0.95% vs 1.27%, P = .15). Compliance with the American Diabetes Association recommendation for hemoglobin A_1c inpatient testing frequency increased from 37.3% to 64.5% (P < .001). The length of stay did not differ between the groups.ConclusionsImplementation of a hospital-wide, CPOE-based, hyperglycemia management protocol had a favorable impact onglucose targets, decreasing excessively high glucose levels without increasing clinically meaningful hypoglycemic events. Compliance with hemoglobin A_1c testing recommendations also improved. (Endocr Pract. 2010;16:389-397)     

Relationship Between Glycemic Control and Readmission Rates in Patients Hospitalized With Congestive Heart Failure During Implementation of Hospital-Wide Initiatives

ObjectiveTo determine the relationship between inpatient glycemic control and hospital readmission in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF).MethodsWe used an electronic data collection tool to identify patients with a discharge diagnosis of CHF who underwent point-of-care glucose assessments. Timeweighted mean glucose (TWMG), hemoglobin A1c, and glycemic lability index (GLI) served as glycemic indicators, and readmission for CHF was determined at 30 days and between 30 and 90 days.ResultsThe analysis included 748 patients. After adjustment for significant covariates, log-transformed increasing TWMG (odds ratio 3.3; P = .03) and log-transformed hemoglobin A1c (odds ratio 5.5; P = .04) were independently associated with higher readmission for CHF between 30 and 90 days, but not by 30 days. Renal disease, African American race, and year of hospital admission were also significantly associated with readmission, but GLI was not. There was no significant difference in TWMG when analyzed on the basis of race or renal status. We noted a decrease in TWMG (P = .004) and a trend for reduction in readmission rates between 30 and 90 days (P = .06) after hospital-wide interventions were implemented to improve glycemic control, but no significant difference was detected in GLI or hypoglycemia.ConclusionIncreasing glucose exposure, but not glycemic variability, was associated with higher risk of readmission between 30 and 90 days in patients with CHF. Prospective studies are needed to confirm or refute these results. (Endocr Pract. 2010;16:945-951)     

Implementation of an Electronic Dashboard with A Remote Management System to Improve Glycemic Management Among Hospitalized Adults

Objective: Better glycemic control for hospitalized diabetic patients significantly reduces health expenditures and improves disease outcomes. We developed a dynamic dashboard with a remote management system and evaluated its impact on inpatient glycemic control.Methods: This was an observational institution-wide study; study participants were enrolled from a 1,500-bed public medical center from 2016 to 2018. We evaluated the impact of a dynamic dashboard system, which analyzed and monitored all glucose data with virtual glycemic management recommendation by a team of endocrinologists, over 3 × 1-year periods: 2016 (pre-implementation), 2017 (development), and 2018 (implementation).Results: A total of 51,641 discharges with 878,159 blood glucose measurements were obtained during the 3-year period. After implementation of the dashboard system, the proportion of patients with poor glycemic control (hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia) was reduced by 31% (from 10.2 to 7.0 per day per 100 patients with glucose monitoring; P<.001); hyperglycemia decreased by 25% (from 6.1 to 4.6 per day per 100 patients with glucose monitoring; P<.001), and hypoglycemia decreased by 45% (from 4.2 to 2.3 per day per 100 patients with glucose monitoring; P<.001). Furthermore, the trend in the proportion of patients within the treat-to-target range showed significant improvement (P<.001) during the development period, with effectiveness maintained throughout the implementation period.Conclusion: We successfully installed a dynamic, electronic medical records-based dashboard monitoring system to improve inpatient glycemic control. The system, supported by a team of endocrinologists via remote recommendations, could efficiently fill an important need for improved glycemic management among hospitalized adults.Abbreviations: CDE = certified diabetes educator; DM = diabetes mellitus; EMR = electronic medical record; POC = point-of-care; TCVGH = Taichung Veterans General Hospital; UCSF = University of California, San Francisco; U.S. = United States; vGMS = virtual glucose management service     

Management of Inpatient Hyperglycemia: Assessing Perceptions and Barriers to Care Among Resident Physicians

Objective:To develop insight into resident physician attitudes about inpatient hyperglycemia and determine perceived barriers to optimal management.Methods:As part of a planned educational program, a questionnaire was designed and administered to determine the opinions of residents about the importance o inpatient glucose control, their perceptions about what glucose ranges were desirable, and the problems they encountered when trying to manage hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients.ResultsOf 70 resident physicians from various services, 52 completed the survey (mean age, 31 years; 48% men; 37% in first year of residency training). Most respondents indicated that glucose control was “very important” in critically ill and perioperative patients but only “somewhat important” in non-critically ill patients. Most residents indicated that they would target a therapeutic glucose range within the recommended levels in published guidelines. Most residents also said they felt “somewhat comfortable” managing hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia and using subcutaneous insulin therapy. whereas most residents (48%) were “not at all comfortable” with use of intravenous administration of insulin. In general, respondents were not very familiar with existing institutional policies and preprinted order sets relating to glucose management. The most commonly reported barrier to management of inpatient hyperglycemia was lack of knowledge about appropriate insulin regimens and how to use them. Anxiety about hypoglycemia was only the third most frequent concern.ConclusionMost residents acknowledged the importance of good glucose control in hospitalized patients and chose target glucose ranges consistent with existing guidelines. Lack of knowledge about insulin treatment options was the most commonly cited barrier to ideal management. Educational programs should emphasize inpatient treatment strategies for glycemic control. (Endocr Pract. 2007;13:117-125)     

Inpatient Glycemic Control on the Vascular Surgery Service

ObjectiveTo describe a structured inpatient insulin management protocol and order set for glycemic control on a vascular surgery service.MethodsPatients admitted to the vascular surgery service with underlying diabetes were enrolled in a study of use of a preprinted basal-bolus insulin order set based on a total daily dose of 0.5 U/kg (0.25 U/kg of insulin glargine and 0.25 U/kg of insulin aspart divided into 3 equal mealtime doses). Outcomes included the mean glycemic control at each of 5 established time intervals, the percentage of blood glucose measurements within the target range of 70 to 180 mg/dL, the incidence of hypoglycemia, and the insulin dosages. Historical control patients with diabetes from the same hospital service were used for comparison.ResultsBoth the study group and the control group consisted of 26 patients. The number of finger-stick blood glucose measurements performed was 871 in the control group and 896 in the intervention group. The mean blood glucose level (± SD) for the intervention group was 149.4 ± 50.7 mg/dL, in comparison with 165.2 ± 64.4 mg/dL for the control group. The incidence of hypoglycemia decreased 50% in the intervention group—from 32 (4% of the finger-stick assessments in the control group) to 19 (2% of the finger-stick blood glucose measurements in the study group). The blood glucose target range of 70 to 180 mg/dL was achieved in 75% of the measurements in the study group versus 61% in the control group. The basal insulin dose was unchanged in 65% of the patients, and of the 9 patients requiring a change in the dose, 5 had the dose decreased by 10% and 4 had the dose increased by 10%.ConclusionThe use of a standardized basal-bolus weight-based insulin regimen was successful at achieving improved glycemic control as well as reducing the incidence of hypoglycemia in an inpatient population with diabetes. (Endocr Pract. 2008;14:185-192)     

Daily Inpatient Glycemic Survey (DINGS): A Process to Remotely Identify and Assist in the Management of Hospitalized Patients with Diabetes and Hyperglycemia

Objective: Hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glycemic variability have been associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and overall costs of care in hospitalized patients. At the Stratton VA Medical Center in Albany, New York, a process aimed to improve inpatient glycemic control by remotely assisting primary care teams in the management of hyperglycemia and diabetes was designed.Methods: An electronic query comprised of hospitalized patients with glucose values <70 mg/dL or >350 mg/dL is generated daily. Electronic medical records (EMRs) are individually reviewed by diabetes specialist providers, and management recommendations are sent to primary care teams when applicable. Glucose data was retrospectively examined before and after the establishment of the daily inpatient glycemic survey (DINGS) process, and rates of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia were compared.Results: Patient-day mean glucose slightly but significantly decreased from 177.6 ± 64.4 to 173.2 ± 59.4 mg/dL (P<.001). The percentage of patient-days with any value >350 mg/dL also decreased from 9.69 to 7.36% (P<.001), while the percentage of patient-days with mean glucose values in the range of 90 to 180 mg/dL increased from 58.1 to 61.4% (P<.001). Glycemic variability, assessed by the SD of glucose, significantly decreased from 53.9 to 49.8 mg/dL (P<.001). Moreover, rates of hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) decreased significantly by 41% (P<.001).Conclusion: Quality metrics of inpatient glycemic control improved significantly after the establishment of the DINGS process within our facility. Prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm a causal association.Abbreviations: DINGS = daily inpatient glycemic survey EMR = electronic medical record HbA1c = glycated hemoglobin ICU = intensive care unit VA = Veterans Affairs     

Once-Daily Insulin Glargine Versus 6-Hour Sliding Scale Regular Insulin for Control of Hyperglycemia after a Bariatric Surgical Procedure: A Randomized Clinical Trial

ObjectiveTo determine whether once-daily insulin glargine could provide better glycemic control after an abdominal surgical procedure than the traditional use of sliding scale regular insulin (SSRI).MethodsBecause 20% to 30% of patients undergoing gastric bypass have a history of overt diabetes and another 5% to 10% are estimated to have impaired glucose tolerance, we chose to study these patients. We treated 81 patients with postoperative blood glucose levels of more than 144 mg/dL after a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgical procedure. They were randomized to receive either SSRI or insulin glargine either directly or after initial intravenous insulin infusion in the intensive care unit (ICU).ResultsOverall, the mean blood glucose level after SSRI therapy was 154 ± 33 mg/dL, and the mean blood glucose value after insulin glargine treatment was 134 ± 30 mg/dL (P < 0.01). The mean blood glucose level for patients first treated with intravenous insulin infusion in the ICU was 125 mg/dL, in comparison with 145 mg/dL in the non-ICU patients whose treatment began directly with 0.3 U/kg of insulin glargine. Of 926 blood glucose measurements, only 3 were less than 60 mg/dL.ConclusionIn this study, control of postoperative hyperglycemia was significantly better with use of insulin glargine in comparison with SSRI therapy, and hypo-glycemia was very infrequent. (Endocr Pract. 2007;13: 225-231)     

Effect of An Educational Inpatient Diabetes Management Program on Medical Resident Knowledge and Measures of Glycemic Control: A Randomized Controlled Trial

ObjectiveTo investigate the effectiveness of an Inpatient Diabetes Management Program (IDMP) on physician knowledge and inpatient glycemic control.MethodsResidents assigned to General Internal Medicine inpatient services were randomized to receive the IDMP (IDMP group) or usual education only (nonIDMP group). Both groups received an overview of inpatient diabetes management in conjunction with reminders of existing order sets on the hospital Web site. The IDMP group received print copies of the program and access to an electronic version for a personal digital assistant (PDA). A Diabetes Knowledge Test (DKT) was administered at baseline and at the end of the 1-month rotation. The frequency of hyperglycemia among patients under surveillance by each group was compared by using capillary blood glucose values and a dispersion index of glycemic variability. IDMP users completed a questionnaire related to the program.ResultsTwenty-two residents participated (11 in the IDMP group and 11 in the non-IDMP group). Overall Diabetes Knowledge Test scores improved in both groups (IDMP: 69% ± 1.7% versus 83% ± 2.1%, P = .003; nonIDMP: 76% ± 1.2% versus 84% ± 1.4%, P = .02). The percentage of correct responses for management of corticosteroid-associated hyperglycemia (P = .004) and preoperative glycemic management (P = .006) improved in only the IDMP group. The frequency of hyperglycemia (blood glucose level > 180 mg/dL) and the dispersion index (5.3 ± 7.6 versus 3.7 ± 5.6; P = .2) were similar between the 2 groups.ConclusionAn IDMP was effective at improving physician knowledge for managing hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients treated with corticosteroids or in preparation for surgical procedures. Educational programs directed at improving overall health care provider knowledge for inpatient glycemic management may be beneficial; however, improvements in knowledge do not necessarily result in improved glycemic outcomes. (Endocr Pract. 2012;18:238-249)     

Effects of a Computerized Order Set on the Inpatient Management of Hyperglycemia: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of a computerized order set on the inpatient management of diabetes and hyperglycemia.MethodsWe conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial on the general medical service of an academic medical center staffed by residents and hospitalists. Consecutively enrolled patients with diabetes mellitus or inpatient hyperglycemia were randomized on the basis of their medical team to usual care (control group) or an admission order set built into the hospital’s computer provider order entry (CPOE) system (intervention group). All teams received a detailed subcutaneous insulin protocol and case-based education. The primary outcome was the mean percent of glucose readings per patient between 60 and 180 mg/dL.ResultsBetween April 5 and June 22, 2006, we identified 179 eligible study subjects. The mean percent of glucose readings per patient between 60 and 180 mg/dL was 75% in the intervention group and 71% in the usual care group (adjusted relative risk, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.80). In comparison with usual care, the intervention group also had a lower patient-day weighted mean glucose (148 mg/dL versus 158 mg/dL, P = .04), less use of sliding-scale insulin by itself (25% versus 58%, P = .01), and no significant difference in the rate of severe hypoglycemia (glucose < 40 mg/dL; 0.5% versus 0.3% of patient-days, P = .58).ConclusionThe use of an order set built into a hospital’s CPOE system led to improvements in glycemic control and insulin ordering without causing a significant increase in hypoglycemia. Other institutions with CPOE should consider adopting similar order sets as part of a comprehensive inpatient glycemic management program. (Endocr Pract. 2010;16:209-218)