The effectiveness of a hospital diabetes outreach service in supporting care for acutely admitted patients with diabetes

Proactive review for people with diabetes in hospital: a cluster randomised feasibility trial with process evaluation, protocol V3.1

BACKGROUND

Diabetes inpatient specialist services vary across the country, with limited evidence to guide service delivery. Currently, referrals to diabetes inpatient specialists are usually 'reactive' after diabetes-related events have taken place, which are associated with an increased risk of morbidity/mortality and increased length of hospital stay. We propose that a proactive diabetes review model of care, delivered by diabetes inpatient specialist nurses, may contribute to the prevention of such diabetes-related events and result in a reduction in the risk of harm.

METHOD

We will conduct a cluster randomised feasibility study with process evaluation. The proactive diabetes review model (PDRM) is a complex intervention that focuses on the prevention of potentially modifiable diabetes-related harms. All eligible patients will receive a comprehensive, structured diabetes review that aims to identify and prevent potentially modifiable diabetes-related harms through utilising a standardised review structure. Reviews are undertaken by a diabetes inpatient specialist nurse within one working day of admission. This differs from usual care where patients are often only seen after diabetes-related harms have taken place. The trial duration will be approximately 32 weeks, with intervention delivery throughout. There will be an initial 8-week run-in phase, followed by a 24-week data collection phase. Eight wards will be equally randomised to either PDRM or usual care. Adult patients with a known diagnosis of diabetes admitted to an included ward will be eligible. Data collection will be limited to that typically collected as part of usual care. Data collected will include descriptive data at both the ward and patient level and glucose measures, such as frequency and results of capillary glucose testing, ketonaemia and hypoglycaemic events. The analysis aims to determine the fidelity and acceptability of the intervention and the feasibility of a future definitive trial. Whilst this study is primarily about trial feasibility, the findings of the process evaluation may lead to changes to both trial processes and modifications to the intervention. A qualitative process evaluation will be conducted in parallel to the trial. A minimum of 22 patients, nurses, doctors, and managers will be recruited with methods including direct non-participant observation and semi-structured interviews. The feasibility of a future definitive trial will be assessed by evaluating recruitment and randomisation processes, staffing resources and quality of available data.

DISCUSSION

The aim of this cluster randomised feasibility trial with a process evaluation is to explore the feasibility of a definitive trial and identify appropriate outcome measures. If a trial is feasible and the effectiveness of PDRM can be evaluated, this could inform the future development of inpatient diabetes services nationally.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UK Clinical Research Network, 51,167. ISRCTN, ISRCTN70402110. Registered on 21 February 2022.

The effectiveness of in-hospital interventions on reducing hospital length of stay and readmission of patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A systematic review

AIM

This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of multifaceted in-hospital interventions for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on hospital readmission, hospital length of stay (LOS), and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c).

METHODS

The search included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Emcare, Web of Science, PsycINFO and Google Scholar from 2007 to current date and restricted to English. The differences in outcome measures were calculated to determine the effectiveness.

RESULTS

The title and abstract of 3251 records were initially screened. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies comprised of a wide range of intervention components and outcome measures. The reduction in hospital LOS ranged from 0.5 to 0.8 of a day. Clinically significant improvements in HbA1c concentration levels ranged from a mean reduction of -1.1 (±2.2) mmol/L to -2.8 (±2.7) mmol/L. There were no significant changes in hospital readmission rates and no evidence of the impact of HbA1c on hospital LOS and readmission. Common strategies in reducing hospital LOS and HbA1c were a dedicated care team, hospital wide approach, quality improvement focus, insulin therapy, early short-term intensive program, transition to primary care physicians, and on-going outpatient follow-up for at least 6-12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings illustrate that multifaceted in-hospital intervention for patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes can contribute to improvements in hospital LOS and HbA1c concentration.

Initiatives for improving delayed discharge from a hospital setting: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The overarching objective of the scoping review was to examine peer reviewed and grey literature for best practices that have been developed, implemented and/or evaluated for delayed discharge involving a hospital setting. Two specific objectives were to review what the delayed discharge initiatives entailed and identify gaps in the literature in order to inform future work.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

Electronic databases and websites of government and healthcare organisations were searched for eligible articles. Articles were required to include an initiative that focused on delayed discharge, involve a hospital setting and be published between 1 January 2004 and 16 August 2019. Data were extracted using Microsoft Excel. Following extraction, a policy framework by Doern and Phidd was adapted to organise the included initiatives into categories: (1) information sharing; (2) tools and guidelines; (3) practice changes; (4) infrastructure and finance and (5) other.

RESULTS

Sixty-six articles were included in this review. The majority of initiatives were categorised as practice change (n=36), followed by information sharing (n=19) and tools and guidelines (n=19). Numerous initiatives incorporated multiple categories. The majority of initiatives were implemented by multidisciplinary teams and resulted in improved outcomes such as reduced length of stay and discharge delays. However, the experiences of patients and families were rarely reported. Included initiatives also lacked important contextual information, which is essential for replicating best practices and scaling up.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review identified a number of initiatives that have been implemented to target delayed discharges. While the majority of initiatives resulted in positive outcomes, delayed discharges remain an international problem. There are significant gaps and limitations in evidence and thus, future work is warranted to develop solutions that have a sustainable impact.

Seizure-related hospital admissions, readmissions and costs: Comparisons with asthma and diabetes in South Australia

PURPOSE

Seizures are listed as an Ambulatory Care Sensitive Condition (ACSC), where, in some cases, hospitalisation may be avoided with appropriate preventative and early management in primary care. We examined the frequencies, trends and financial costs of first and subsequent seizure-related hospital admissions in the adult and paediatric populations, with comparisons to bronchitis/asthma and diabetes admissions in South Australia between 2012 and 2014.

METHODS

De-identified hospital separation data from five major public hospitals in metropolitan South Australia were analysed to determine the number of children and adults admitted for the following Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Groups: seizure related conditions; bronchitis/asthma; and diabetes. Additional data included length of hospital stay and type of admission. Demographic data were analysed to identify whether social determinants influence admission, and a macro costing approach was then applied to calculate the financial costs to the Health Care System.

RESULTS

The rate of total seizure hospitalizations was 649 per 100,000; lower than bronchitis/asthma (751/100,000), yet higher than diabetes (500/100,000). The highest proportions of subsequent separations were recorded by children with seizures regardless of complexity (47% +CSCC; 17% -CSCC) compared with asthma (11% +CSCC; 14% -CSCC) or diabetes (14% +CSCC; 13% -CSCC), and by adults with seizures with catastrophic or severe complications/comorbidity (25%), compared with diabetes (22%) or asthma (14%). The mean cost per separation in both children and adults was highest for diabetes (AU$4438/$7656), followed by seizures (AU$2408/$5691) and asthma (AU$2084/$3295).

CONCLUSIONS

Following the lead of well-developed and resourced health promotion initiatives in asthma and diabetes, appropriate primary care, community education and seizure management services (including seizure clinics) should be targeted in an effort to reduce seizure related hospitalisations which may be avoidable, minimise costs to the health budget, and maximise health care quality.

Interdisciplinary Diabetes Care: A New Model for Inpatient Diabetes Education

A patient-centered interdisciplinary diabetes care model was implemented at Vidant Medical Center in Greenville, N.C., a 909-bed tertiary care teaching hospital, for the purpose of providing all patients with diabetes clear and concise instructions on diabetes survival skills. Survival skills education during hospitalization is needed for safe transition to community resources for continued and expanded diabetes self-management education. This article describes the process used to develop, implement, and evaluate the model. This initiative achieved substantial cost savings, with no significant changes in length of stay (LOS) or diabetes readmission rates. This patient-centered model demonstrates how a team of interdisciplinary health care professionals can integrate services in providing care for a large population of patients with chronic disease.

Non elective re-admissions to an acute hospital in people with diabetes: Causes and the potential for avoidance. The WICKED project

INTRODUCTION

Managing people with diabetes is a health priority worldwide. Cost benefit attempts at avoiding non elective admissions (NEA) have had some success. To develop an NEA avoidance service, we audited multiple NEA in those with diabetes.

METHOD

All people with diabetes who had ≥3 NEA to our hospital over 12 months were identified (n=418); 104 (1 in 4) patients were randomly selected and retrospective data collected in 98 subjects on their index (latest, 3rd) admission.

RESULTS

Of 98 subjects (50 males, 60 Caucasians, 86 type 2 diabetes, aged 69±16 years).Conditions contributing to admission included: Significant co-morbidities in 95 patients (≥2 in 57, ≥4 in 24). Only 14 admission were directly due to diabetes: hypoglycaemia (5); hyperglycaemia (6); DKA (2), Infected foot ulcer (1).97 admissions were justified at the time of presentation. However whilst 78 were unavoidable, 19 were deemed avoidable amongst whom 10 were diabetes related.

CONCLUSION

The majority of re-admissions were due to multi-morbidity and were often non-diabetes related. The concept of avoidability must be distinguished from point justification at the time of acute need. This would allow the prospective identification of high risk patients and requires an integrated working process to avoid NEA.

In-patient diabetes care: the impact of diabetes outreach team on long-term glycaemic control

AIM

Our aim is to assess the impact of inpatient diabetes services on glycaemic control in patient with diabetes admitted to a secondary care hospital in UK.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all diabetes mellitus (DM) in-patients who were seen by our Diabetes Outreach Team from June 2007 to December 2010. Those with an admission diagnosis of hypoglycaemia were excluded. Blood samples including HbA1c at the initial visit and subsequent outpatient follow-up at 3-6 months were collected. Patients admitted with newly diagnosed diabetes were analysed separately.

RESULTS

In total 2002 patient data were captured. 778 patients were eliminated initially because of failure to attend follow-up clinic, lack of follow-up HbA1c data, and because of planned discharge to the community. Complete blood samples were available for 1224 patients. Of this, 235 patients (19.2% of those with complete data) were analysed separately as their primary diagnosis was hypoglycaemia. In the remaining 989 patients, 31 (3.1%) new onset Type 1 DM patients and 91 (9.2%) new onset Type 2 patients were analysed separately. In patients with known DM (n = 867) HbA1c improved from 75 mmol/mol (9.0% ± 2.39) to 69 mmol/mol (8.46% ± 2.0) (p < 0.001). In the newly diagnosed Type 1 DM (n = 31) patients HbA1c improved from 114 mmol/mol (12.55% ± 2.27) to 58 mmol/mol (7.43% ± 2.05) (p < 0.001). In the newly diagnosed Type 2 DM (n = 91) patients HbA1c improved from 93 mmol/mol (10.70% ± 3.04) to 56 mol/mol (7.29% ± 1.74) (p < 0.001). In those who presented with hypoglycaemia (n = 235) HbA1c changed from 58 mmol/mol (7.48% ± 1.59) to 59 mmol/mol (7.59% ± 1.57) (p = 0.2).

CONCLUSION

By providing a comprehensive care, structured education and appropriate intervention through our Diabetes Outreach Team, we have shown a significant reduction in HbA1c for recently hospitalised patients.

A systematic review of evidence on the association between hospitalisation for chronic disease related ambulatory care sensitive conditions and primary health care resourcing

Background

Primary health care is recognised as an integral part of a country’s health care system. Measuring hospitalisations, that could potentially be avoided with high quality and accessible primary care, is one indicator of how well primary care services are performing. This review was interested in the association between chronic disease related hospitalisations and primary health care resourcing.

Methods

Studies were included if peer reviewed, written in English, published between 2002 and 2012, modelled hospitalisation as a function of PHC resourcing and identified hospitalisations for type 2 diabetes as a study outcome measure. Access and use of PHC services were used as a proxy for PHC resourcing. Studies in populations with a predominant user pay system were excluded to eliminate patient financial barriers to PHC access and utilisation. Articles were systematically excluded based on the inclusion criteria, to arrive at the final set of studies for review.

Results

The search strategy identified 1778 potential articles using EconLit, Medline and Google Scholar databases. Ten articles met the inclusion criteria and were subject to review. PHC resources were quantified by workforce (either medical or nursing) numbers, number of primary care episodes, service availability (e.g. operating hours), primary care practice size (e.g. single or group practitioner practice—a larger practice has more care disciplines onsite), or financial incentive to improve quality of diabetes care. The association between medical workforce numbers and ACSC hospitalisations was mixed. Four of six studies found that less patients per doctor was significantly associated with a decrease in ambulatory care sensitive hospitalisations, one study found the opposite and one study did not find a significant association between the two. When results were categorised by PHC access (e.g. GPs/capita, range of services) and use (e.g. n out-patient visits), better access to quality PHC resulted in fewer ACSC hospitalisations. This finding remained when only studies that adjusted for health status were categorised. Financial incentives to improve the quality of diabetes care were associated with less ACSC hospitalisations, reported in one study.

Conclusion

Seven of 12 measures of the relationship between PHC resourcing and ACSC hospitalisations had a significant inverse association. As a collective body of evidence the studies provide inconclusive support that more PHC resourcing is associated with reduced hospitalisation for ACSC. Characteristics of improved or increased PHC access showed inverse significant associations with fewer ACSC hospitalisations after adjustment for health status. The varied measures of hospitalisation, PHC resourcing, and health status may contribute to inconsistent findings among studies and make it difficult to interpret findings.

The role of the care model in modifying prognosis in diabetes

Organizational factors in diabetes care can influence long- and medium-term outcomes, affecting the prognosis to the same extent as new therapies. A growing body of evidence supports the hypothesis that diabetes team consultation can favorably impact on hospital utilization, the costliest item in diabetes management, as well as on hospitalization rates, inpatient hospital length of stay, and re-admission rates. Moreover, the model of diabetes care has been reported to influence guidelines adherence, an additional factor linked to the variability in the quality of diabetes care. The strongest predictor and effect modifier of the quality of diabetes care is specialist referral. Compared to patients seen in primary care or other settings, those visiting a diabetes center are more likely to be monitored according to guidelines, regardless of the severity-of-disease effect, and to receive structured education, as well as more aggressive treatment when needed. Finally, at least eight published studies suggest that when continuity of care is shared with diabetes clinics, all-cause mortality and major cardiovascular events are both reduced. The sharing of care pathways between primary care providers and diabetes teams is likely to be the best and most affordable solution in the complex management of this chronic condition.

Diabetes Transitional Care from Inpatient to Outpatient Setting

Purpose: Diabetes transitional care from the inpatient to outpatient setting is understudied. This study evaluated the effect of inpatient pharmacist discharge counseling on outpatient diabetes medication adherence. Research methods: Prospective, randomized, controlled study compared pharmacist discharge counseling (intervention) with usual patient care (control) in 127 patients with established diabetes and an A1C ≥8% who had a provider and medications filled within the county health system. The primary outcome was diabetes medication adherence rate measured using the prescription of days covered (PDC) method. Results: Patients in the intervention, compared with control group, had greater diabetes medication adherence rate 150 days after discharge (55.2% vs 34.8%; P = .002), rate of follow-up visits (60.5% vs 43.9%; P = .01) and reduction in A1C (−1.97% vs +0.114%; P = .003). Being in the intervention group and having greater adherence with follow-up visits correlated independently with lower follow-up A1C. Conclusion: Transitional care in the form of inpatient education geared to improve self-management after hospital discharge. This may serve as a paradigm to improve outpatient adherence rate with medications, follow-up visits, and A1C reduction.