An approach to diabetes mellitus in hospice and palliative medicine

Management of Critical Glucose Values in Hospice

Objectives: This quality improvement (QI) project was to lean the process for managing critical high and low glucose levels in the hospice unit and to simplify the pharmacologic options for hypoglycemic management for nursing staff. Methods: The process for developing and refining the recommendations involved a modified Delphi approach with a team of key stakeholders with overlapping expertise in hospice care practice. Recommendations were based on literature review, judgement of experts, and clinical experience. Stakeholders ranked six potential solutions and two were prioritized within the scope of this project. Results: From 1/1/21 - 12/31/21, there were 48 veterans with insulin sliding scale orders in the hospice unit, of which there were six critical values acted on. A standard operating procedure (SOP) for the management of critical glucose values in hospice was developed based on updated processes. In addition, hospice patient specific insulin sliding scale order sets were created and endorsed for utilization and dissemination. Following implementation on 3/1/22, no critical values were found in the hospice unit from 3/1/22 - 6/1/22 during the sustainment period. Conclusions: The implementation of hospice insulin sliding scale order sets and SOP on the management of critical glucose values in hospice reduced the number of critical glucose values.

13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

13. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

End-of-Life Care Requires Caution with Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Use of medical device technologies for diabetes mellitus, including continuous glucose monitoring devices, is becoming more frequently encountered in end-of-life care. Good communication is paramount to determine patient and carer preferences for if, when, and how blood glucose monitoring should occur in the end-of-life setting. We present two differing cases of how continuous glucose monitoring in an Australian setting impacted end-of-life care for the patients and their carers.

12. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

12. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Management of Diabetes Mellitus in Adults at the End of Life: A Review of Recent Literature and Guidelines

Background: The prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) is rising with an increased risk of developing it as a person ages. Therefore, more persons will have comorbid DM throughout their health journey and are potentially prone to unpleasant symptoms associated with poor glycemic control at the end of life (EOL). We performed an in-depth literature review to examine evidence-based recommendations on DM management at the EOL. Design: A librarian-assisted systematic and gray literature search was performed in electronic clinical databases and Google™ for diabetes management articles (DMAs). National and international diabetes, palliative care, and general guideline websites were searched for clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Inclusion criteria: adults ≥18 years with terminal illnesses, articles published between 2007 and 2017 with blood sugar target, monitoring frequency, and management recommendations for type 1 and type 2 DM. Exclusion criteria: conference poster abstracts and CPGs without published year or references. Two independent appraisers evaluated the CPGs using the "Rigour of Development" domain of the Appraisal of Guideline Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Results: Nine full-text DMAs were included for review from 2476 screened articles. Twenty-one CPG websites were searched. For the six included CPGs, the AGREE II "Rigour of Development" domain scores ranged from 6% to 34%. We found no high-quality evidence for DM management at the EOL. Treatment recommendations were based primarily on expert opinion (level IV evidence). Conclusions: Higher quality studies are required to inform a standardized approach to the management of DM at the EOL.

12. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2019

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Managing people with diabetes during the cancer palliation in the era of simultaneous care

Managing people with diabetes and cancer during palliation constitutes a daunting challenge. Cancer, diabetes and treatment toxicity could be seen as a "Bermuda Triangle" for physician and health care professionals in general. Based on literature review, the present paper stresses the distinctive aspects that diabetes and cancer together involve and bring out. Considering the simultaneous care approach as the basement of our perspective, we explore the areas of palliative intervention for which the specific features of persons with diabetes and cancer emerge: pain manifestation and treatment, response to opioids, psychosocial and communication aspects, infection-related susceptibility and complications. The overall impact of suffering that these two diseases in association involve requires new awareness and a cultural attitude towards new network based approaches in order to strengthen the person-centered health care in this field.

[Treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in elderly patients]

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) increases markedly with age. Antidiabetic treatment and the objectives of glycaemic control in elderly patients with DM2 should be individualised according to their biopsychosocial characteristics. In elderly patients for whom the benefits of intensive antidiabetic treatment are limited, the basic objectives should be to improve the quality of life, preserve functionality and avoid adverse effects, especially hypoglycaemia. Treatment of DM2 in the elderly was the subject of a consensus document published in 2012 and endorsed by several Spanish scientific societies. Since then, new therapeutic groups and evidence have emerged that warrant an update to this consensus document. The present document focuses on the therapeutic aspects of DM2 in elderly patients, understood as being older than 75 years or frail.

Treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in elderly patients

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) increases markedly with age. Antidiabetic treatment and the objectives of glycaemic control in elderly patients with DM2 should be individualised according to their biopsychosocial characteristics. In elderly patients for whom the benefits of intensive antidiabetic treatment are limited, the basic objectives should be to improve the quality of life, preserve functionality and avoid adverse effects, especially hypoglycaemia. Treatment of DM2 in the elderly was the subject of a consensus document published in 2012 and endorsed by several Spanish scientific societies. Since then, new therapeutic groups and evidence have emerged that warrant an update to this consensus document. The present document focuses on the therapeutic aspects of DM2 in elderly patients, understood as being older than 75 years or frail.

11. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2018

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Importance of Glycemic Control in Cancer Patients with Diabetes: Treatment through End of Life

Cancer patients with diabetes are at increased risk for developing infections, being hospitalized, and requiring chemotherapy reductions or stoppages. While it has been hypothesized that glycemic control increases the risk for these adverse events, few studies have explored this hypothesis. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the importance of glycemic control in patients with diabetes and cancer during treatment through end of life. Glycemic control was found to play a role; the overall level of health-related quality of life experienced by patients with cancer and diabetes, level of symptom severity experienced and can impact the overall survival of the individual. Evidence-based policies and practice guidelines also need to be developed to help clinicians manage these patients during all phases of care. Using diabetes educators and advance practice, nurses to provide management and care coordination services need to be considered. Survivorship care plans should address both cancer and diabetes management. Finally, glycemic control should continue through end of life, with the main goal of avoiding hypoglycemic events.

Management of Diabetes in Long-term Care and Skilled Nursing Facilities: A Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association

Diabetes is more common in older adults, has a high prevalence in long-term care (LTC) facilities, and is associated with significant disease burden and higher cost. The heterogeneity of this population with regard to comorbidities and overall health status is critical to establishing personalized goals and treatments for diabetes. The risk of hypoglycemia is the most important factor in determining glycemic goals due to the catastrophic consequences in this population. Simplified treatment regimens are preferred, and the sole use of sliding scale insulin (SSI) should be avoided. This position statement provides a classification system for older adults in LTC settings, describes how diabetes goals and management should be tailored based on comorbidities, delineates key issues to consider when using glucose-lowering agents in this population, and provides recommendations on how to replace SSI in LTC facilities. As these patients transition from one setting to another, or from one provider to another, their risk for adverse events increases. Strategies are presented to reduce these risks and ensure safe transitions. This article addresses diabetes management at end of life and in those receiving palliative and hospice care. The integration of diabetes management into LTC facilities is important and requires an interprofessional team approach. To facilitate this approach, acceptance by administrative personnel is needed, as are protocols and possibly system changes. It is important for clinicians to understand the characteristics, challenges, and barriers related to the older population living in LTC facilities as well as the proper functioning of the facilities themselves. Once these challenges are identified, individualized approaches can be designed to improve diabetes management while lowering the risk of hypoglycemia and ultimately improving quality of life.

Improving Diabetes Care for Hospice Patients

Although type 2 diabetes guidelines recommend less aggressive glycemic control for patients with limited life expectancy, many hospice patients continue their glucose-lowering medications, resulting in an increased risk of hypoglycemia. Three common reasons for overly tight glycemic control in hospice patients include (1) discussions about reducing or stopping chronic medications are uncomfortable; (2) many patients and families believe that mild hyperglycemia can cause symptoms; and (3) until 2014, Healthcare Information and Data Information Set (HEDIS) quality indicators for glycemic control included hospice patients. To address these issues, we recommend (1) providers discuss with patients and families upon hospice enrollment that diabetes medications can be reduced or discontinued as their life-limiting disease progresses; (2) keeping blood glucose levels between 200 and 300 mg/dL; and (3) educate providers that HEDIS measures now exclude hospice patients. Implementing these recommendations should decrease the risk of hypoglycemia in hospice patients and improve their quality of life.

Identifying persons with diabetes who could benefit from a palliative approach to care

OBJECTIVE

To determine the need for diabetes mellitus palliative care, we identified persons with a diagnosis of diabetes who accessed palliative care programs and those who may have benefited from a palliative approach to care.

METHODS

This retrospective, descriptive research used 6 linked databases comprising 66 634 Nova Scotians from 3 health districts who died between 1995 and 2009, each with access to a palliative care program and diabetes centres.

RESULTS

The percentage of persons with diabetes enrolled in palliative care increased from 3.2% in 1995 to 34.3% in 2009; 31.5% were enrolled within their last 2 weeks of life. Most did not have their diabetes recorded in palliative data. Among the 5353 persons with a diagnosis of diabetes who died between 2005 and 2009, 61.0% were in the Diabetes Care Program of Nova Scotia registry. An additional 19.6% were identified in the Cardiovascular Health Nova Scotia registry, and a further 3.7% in palliative data. Applying the criteria of Rosenwax et al to the 5353, 65.8% to 97.9% may have benefitted from a palliative approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of palliative enrollment for persons with diabetes are increasing. Diabetes care providers need to prepare patients and their families for changes in diabetes management that will be beneficial as end of life approaches. Collaboration among chronic disease programs, palliative care and primary care is advised to identify persons at end of life who have diabetes and to develop and implement care guidelines for this population.

Information needs of family carers of people with diabetes at the end of life: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Recent research identified the issue that family carers of people with diabetes at the end of life (EOL) did not receive sufficient information to enable them to help their relative manage their diabetes at the EOL.

AIM

The aim of the current study was to undertake a literature review to identify the information needs of family carers of people with diabetes at the EOL.

METHOD

A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted by searching the following databases: CINAHL, PubMed, PsychInfo, Scopus, and SocINDEX. The grey literature was also searched for papers relevant to the aim. All study designs were included. A content analysis of relevant papers was undertaken to identify themes.

RESULTS

Sixteen of the more than 300 papers identified addressed the information needs of family carers of people with diabetes at the EOL and were included in the review. Five key themes were identified from the papers reviewed: (1) performing diabetes care tasks, (2) focus of care, (3) blood glucose management, (4) EOL stages, and (5) involving patients and family carers in decisions about diabetes care. Most of the 16 papers represented the views of health professionals and focused on the need to provide information about the medical aspects of diabetes management.

CONCLUSIONS

The review suggests further research is needed to identify the information needs of family carers of people with diabetes at the EOL to enable interventions to be developed to support the family carers and meet their unique information needs.

Developing clinical guidelines for end-of-life care: blending evidence and consensus

BACKGROUND

Developing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is challenging, particularly in areas that are difficult to research such as end-of-life care.

AIM

To describe the process that staff in a large regional health-care service in Victoria, Australia, used to develop CPGs for managing diabetes at the end of life.

METHOD

An interdisciplinary advisory group was appointed, a structured literature review undertaken, personal illness accounts sourced, and a guiding philosophy formulated. Individual interviews were conducted with people with diabetes and their carers. Formative and summative evaluation was undertaken.

RESULTS

No level I or II evidence was identified. The interviews yielded important information about how people wanted their diabetes managed. Formative evaluation enabled stakeholders to participate in developing the CPGs. The summative evaluation confirmed the CPGs are easy to use and appropriate to clinical staff.

CONCLUSIONS

The CPG development process yielded the best current evidence on which to base care plans and person-centred CPGs.