Sliding Scale Insulin Use in Nursing Homes Before and After Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To characterize sliding-scale insulin (SSI) use in US nursing homes (NHs) before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 129,829 US NH residents on SSI (01/2018-06/2022) across 12 NH chains with a common electronic health record system.

METHODS

Among all residents with at least 1 administration of SSI documented in the electronic medication administration record, we described resident demographics, frequency of SSI monotherapy vs combination therapy with another diabetes medication, number of daily capillary blood glucose readings ("fingersticks"), and hypoglycemia (capillary blood glucose <70 mg/dL) and hyperglycemia after first SSI use. We used interrupted time series analysis (ITS) with segmented linear regression models to examine whether the monthly prevalence of SSI use changed at and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020).

RESULTS

There were 129,829 unique NH residents with SSI use [51% women, average age 71.3 (SD 11.7) years]. Of these, 36% of residents received SSI monotherapy and 64% received SSI combination therapy. Residents on SSI received an average of 3.96 (SD 1.41) fingersticks per day. Overall, 26% of SSI users experienced a hypoglycemic event within 30 days of the first SSI dose. The ITS analysis identified a step decrease in the rate of SSI use following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (43 fewer SSI users per 1000 insulin users) but no change in overall trend over time from before the onset of the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

SSI use and fingerstick burden are high in NH residents. Hypoglycemia occurred commonly among residents on SSI. Future research should compare the safety and effectiveness of SSI monotherapy vs other diabetes medication regimens to guide person-centered prescribing decisions in NHs.

Fingerstick glucose monitoring by cognitive impairment status in Veterans Affairs nursing home residents with diabetes

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend nursing home (NH) residents with cognitive impairment receive less intensive glycemic treatment and less frequent fingerstick monitoring. Our objective was to determine whether current practice aligns with guideline recommendations by examining fingerstick frequency in Veterans Affairs (VA) NH residents with diabetes across cognitive impairment levels.

METHODS

We identified VA NH residents with diabetes aged ≥65 residing in VA NHs for >30 days between 2016 and 2019. Residents were grouped by cognitive impairment status based on the Cognitive Function Scale: cognitively intact, mild impairment, moderate impairment, and severe impairment. We also categorized residents into mutually exclusive glucose-lowering medication (GLM) categories: (1) no GLMs, (2) metformin only, (3) sulfonylureas/other GLMs (+/- metformin but no insulin), (4) long-acting insulin (+/- oral/other GLMs but no short-acting insulin), and (5) any short-acting insulin. Our outcome was mean daily fingersticks on day 31 of NH admission.

RESULTS

Among 13,637 NH residents, mean age was 75 years and mean hemoglobin A1c was 7.0%. The percentage of NH residents on short-acting insulin varied by cognitive status from 22.7% in residents with severe cognitive impairment to 33.9% in residents who were cognitively intact. Mean daily fingersticks overall on day 31 was 1.50 (standard deviation = 1.73). There was a greater range in mean fingersticks across GLM categories compared to cognitive status. Fingersticks ranged widely across GLM categories from 0.39 per day (no GLMs) to 3.08 (short-acting insulin), while fingersticks ranged slightly across levels of cognitive impairment from 1.11 (severe cognitive impairment) to 1.59 (cognitively intact).

CONCLUSION

NH residents receive frequent fingersticks regardless of level of cognitive impairment, suggesting that cognitive status is a minor consideration in monitoring decisions. Future studies should determine whether decreasing fingersticks in NH residents with moderate/severe cognitive impairment can reduce burdens without compromising safety.

Sliding scale insulin use in a national cohort study of nursing home residents with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Guidelines discourage sliding scale insulin (SSI) use after the first week of a nursing home (NH) admission. We sought to determine the prevalence of SSI and identify factors associated with stopping SSI or transitioning to another short-acting insulin regimen.

METHODS

In an observational study from October 1, 2013, to June 30, 2017 of non-hospice Veterans Affairs NH residents with type 2 diabetes and an NH admission over 1 week, we compared the weekly prevalence of SSI versus two other short-acting insulin regimens - fixed dose insulin (FDI) or correction dose insulin (CDI, defined as variable SSI given alongside fixed doses of insulin) - from week 2 to week 12 of admission. Among those on SSI in week 2, we examined factors associated with stopping SSI or transitioning to other regimens by week 5. Factors included demographics (e.g., age, sex, race/ethnicity), frailty-related factors (e.g., comorbidities, cognitive impairment, functional impairment), and diabetes-related factors (e.g., HbA1c, long-acting insulin use, hyperglycemia, and hypoglycemia).

RESULTS

In week 2, 21% of our cohort was on SSI, 8% was on FDI, and 7% was on CDI. SSI was the most common regimen in frail subgroups (e.g., 18% of our cohort with moderate-severe cognitive impairment was on SSI vs 5% on FDI and 4% on CDI). SSI prevalence decreased steadily from 21% to 16% at week 12 (p for linear trend <0.001), mostly through stopping SSI. Diabetes-related factors (e.g., hyperglycemia) were more strongly associated with continuing SSI or transitioning to a non-SSI short-acting insulin regimen than frailty-related factors.

CONCLUSIONS

SSI is the most common method of administering short-acting insulin in NH residents. More research needs to be done to explore why sliding scale use persists weeks after NH admission and explore how we can replace this practice with safer, more effective, and less burdensome regimens.

Associations Between Implementation of the Caregiver Advise Record Enable (CARE) Act and Health Service Utilization for Older Adults with Diabetes: Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The Caregiver Advise Record Enable (CARE) Act is a state level law that requires hospitals to identify and educate caregivers ("family members or friends") upon discharge.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the association between the implementation of the CARE Act in a Pennsylvania health system and health service utilization (ie, reducing hospital readmission, emergency department [ED] visits, and mortality) for older adults with diabetes.

METHODS

The key elements of the CARE Act were implemented and applied to the patients discharged to home. The data between May and October 2017 were pulled from inpatient electronic health records. Likelihood-ratio chi-square tests and multivariate logistic regression models were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 2591 older inpatients with diabetes with a mean age of 74.6 (SD 7.1) years. Of the 2591 patients, 46.1% (n=1194) were female, 86.9% (n=2251) were White, 97.4% (n=2523) had type 2 diabetes, and 69.5% (n=1801) identified a caregiver. Of the 1801 caregivers identified, 399 (22.2%) received discharge education and training. We compared the differences in health service utilization between pre- and postimplementation of the CARE Act; however, no significance was found. No significant differences were detected from the bivariate analyses in any outcomes between individuals who identified a caregiver and those who declined to identify a caregiver. After adjusting for risk factors (multivariate analysis), those who identified a caregiver (12.2%, 219/1801) was associated with higher rates of 30-day hospital readmission than those who declined to identify a caregiver (9.9%, 78/790; odds ratio [OR] 1.38, 95% CI 1.04-1.87; P=.02). Significantly lower rates were detected in 7-day readmission (P=.02), as well as 7-day (P=.03) and 30-day (P=.01) ED visits, among patients with diabetes whose identified caregiver received education and training than those whose identified caregiver did not receive education and training in the bivariate analyses. However, after adjusting for risk factors, no significance was found in 7-day readmission (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.27-1.05; P=.07), 7-day ED visit (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.38-1.03; P=.07), and 30-day ED visit (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52-1.02; P=.07). No significant associations were found for other outcomes (ie, 30-day readmission and 7-day and 30-day mortality) in both the bivariate and multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that the implementation of the CARE Act was associated with certain health service utilization. The identification of caregivers was associated with higher rates of 30-day hospital readmission in the multivariate analysis, whereas having identified caregivers who received discharge education was associated with lower rates of readmission and ED visit in the bivariate analysis.

Person-Centered Medication Therapy for Diabetes in Older Adults: A Practical Review

Diabetes is one of the most common disease states in older adults and there are significant risks to the use of antidiabetic medications. The older adult population varies greatly in functional ability, independence, and cognition. These factors, along with increased risk of hypoglycemia, falls, and other comorbidities, add to the complexity of creating medication regimens to treat diabetes in older adults. In the current review, a person-centered approach to diabetes care in older adults is described to aid clinician decision making. By keeping the patient and their individual factors in the center of the decision, risks of over- or under-treating diabetes can be minimized. The review will discuss person-centered goal setting, practical approaches to diabetes medication management, and specific considerations for choosing medication classes based on patient characteristics. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 47(10), 7-13.].

Potential Overtreatment and Undertreatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the prevalence, outcomes, and factors associated with potential glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in long-term care facilities (LTCFs).

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Residents with T2DM and aged ≥60 years living in LTCFs.

MEASURES

Articles published between January 2000 and September 2020 were retrieved following a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL plus, and gray literature. Inclusion criteria were the reporting of (1) potential overtreatment and undertreatment quantitatively defined (implicitly or explicitly) based on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and/or blood glucose; (2) prevalence, outcomes, and associated factors of potential glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment; and (3) the study involved residents of LTCFs.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included. Prevalence of potential overtreatment (5%-86%, n = 15 studies) and undertreatment (1.4%-35%, n = 8 studies) varied widely among facilities and geographical locations, and according to definitions used. Prevalence of potential overtreatment was 16%-74% when defined as treatment with a glucose-lowering medication in a resident with ≥1 hypoglycemia risk factor or serious comorbidity, together with a HbA1c <7% (n = 10 studies). Potential undertreatment was commonly defined as residents on glucose-lowering medication having HbA1c >8.5% and the prevalence 1.4%-14.8% (n = 6 studies). No studies prospectively measured resident health outcomes from overtreatment and undertreatment. Potential overtreatment was positively associated with use of oral glucose-lowering medications, dementia diagnosis or dementia severity, and/or need for assistance with activities of daily living (n = 2 studies). Negative association was found between potential overtreatment and use of insulin/combined insulin and oral glucose-lowering medication. No studies reported factors associated with potential undertreatment.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The prevalence of potential glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment varied widely among residents with T2DM depending on the definition(s) used in each study. Longitudinal studies examining associations between glycemic management and health outcomes, and the use of consensus definitions of overtreatment and undertreatment are required to establish findings about actual glycemic overtreatment and undertreatment in LTCFs.

Actual Use of Multiple Health Monitors Among Older Adults With Diabetes: Pilot Study

Background

Previous studies have reported older adults’ perceptions of using health monitors; however, no studies have examined the actual use of multiple health monitors for lifestyle changes over time among older adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Objective

The primary aim of this study was to examine the actual use of multiple health monitors for lifestyle changes over 3 months among older adults with T2D. The secondary aim was to explore changes in caloric intake and physical activity (PA) over 3 months.

Methods

This was a single-group study lasting 3 months. The study sample included participants who were aged ≥65 years with a diagnosis of T2D. Participants were recruited through fliers posted at the Joslin Diabetes Center in Boston. Participants attended five 60-min, biweekly group sessions, which focused on self-monitoring, goal setting, self-regulation to achieve healthy eating and PA habits, and the development of problem-solving skills. Participants were provided with the Lose It! app to record daily food intake and devices such as a Fitbit Alta for monitoring PA, a Bluetooth-enabled blood glucose meter, and a Bluetooth-enabled digital scale. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.

Results

Of the enrolled participants (N=9), the sample was white (8/9, 89%) and female (4/9, 44%), with a mean age of 76.4 years (SD 6.0; range 69-89 years), 15.7 years (SD 2.0) of education, 33.3 kg/m² (SD 3.1) BMI, and 7.4% (SD 0.8) hemoglobin A_1c. Over the 84 days of self-monitoring, the mean percentage of days using the Lose It!, Fitbit Alta, blood glucose meter, and scale were 82.7 (SD 17.6), 85.2 (SD 19.7), 65.3 (SD 30.1), and 53.0 (SD 34.5), respectively. From baseline to completion of the study, the mean daily calorie intake was 1459 (SD 661) at week 1, 1245 (SD 554) at week 11, and 1333 (SD 546) at week 12, whereas the mean daily step counts were 5618 (SD 3654) at week 1, 5792 (SD 3814) at week 11, and 4552 (SD 3616) at week 12. The mean percentage of weight loss from baseline was 4.92% (SD 0.25). The dose of oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin was reduced in 55.6% (5/9) of the participants.

Conclusions

The results from the pilot study are encouraging and suggest the need for a larger study to confirm the outcomes. In addition, a study design that includes a control group with educational sessions but without the integration of technology would offer additional insight to understand the value of mobile health in behavior changes and the health outcomes observed during this pilot study.

Treatment of Diabetes in Older Adults: An Endocrine Society* Clinical Practice Guideline

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to formulate clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of diabetes in older adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes, particularly type 2, is becoming more prevalent in the general population, especially in individuals over the age of 65 years. The underlying pathophysiology of the disease in these patients is exacerbated by the direct effects of aging on metabolic regulation. Similarly, aging effects interact with diabetes to accelerate the progression of many common diabetes complications. Each section in this guideline covers all aspects of the etiology and available evidence, primarily from controlled trials, on therapeutic options and outcomes in this population. The goal is to give guidance to practicing health care providers that will benefit patients with diabetes (both type 1 and type 2), paying particular attention to avoiding unnecessary and/or harmful adverse effects.

A Retrospective Chart Review of Two Different Insulin Administration Systems on Glycemic Control in Older Adults in Long-Term Care

The current retrospective chart review compared glycemic control and cost impact of two insulin administration systems, V-Go^® versus usual care with standard of care (SOC) insulin injections, in eight patients residing in a nursing home (NH). A total of 1,937 blood glucose (BG) values were collected over 61 days. Significant improvements were observed for the V-Go versus SOC group in time in range 100 mg/dL to 200 mg/dL (V-Go 59.09% vs. SOC 34.02%; p < 0.001), reduced BG fluctuations as measured by standard deviation (V-Go 61.2 vs. SOC 92.1; p < 0.001), and improved mean daily BG (V-Go 159.38 mg/dL vs. SOC 223.86 mg/dL; p < 0.001). The estimated A1c change, calculated from BG values, decreased from 8.9% to 7.2% in the V-Go group and increased from 9.0% to 9.4% in the SOC group. Compared to SOC, use of V-Go decreased the mean time for insulin administration by nursing staff by 26.3 minutes per patient per day and associated labor costs by $328.75 per patient per month. Insulin administration with V-Go may improve glycemic control and reduce administration costs compared to existing care in the NH setting. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 43(1), 10-16.].

Using a Clinical Surveillance System to Detect Drug-Associated Hypoglycemia in Nursing Home Residents

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether a clinical surveillance system could be used to detect drug-associated hypoglycemia events and determine their incidence in nursing home (NH) residents.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Four NHs in western Pennsylvania.

PARTICIPANTS

Any resident of the four NHs who had a computer-generated alert detecting potential drug-associated hypoglycemia over a 6-month period were included.

MEASUREMENTS

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize all variables, including the frequency and distribution of alert type according to glucose threshold. Analyses were conducted according to numbers of alerts and residents. The medications associated with the drug-associated hypoglycemia alerts were identified, and frequency of their inclusion in alerts was calculated. Additional calculations included time to drug-associated hypoglycemic event alert from date of admission and frequency of events associated with postacute, short-stay (≤35 days) admissions.

RESULTS

Seven hundred seventy-two alerts involving 141 residents were detected. Ninety (63.8%) residents had a glucose level of 55 mg/dL or less, and 42 (29.8%) had a glucose level of 40 mg/dL or less. Insulin orders were associated with 762 (98.7%) alerts. Overall incidence of drug-associated hypoglycemia events was 9.5 per 1,000 resident-days.

CONCLUSION

Hypoglycemia can be detected using a clinical surveillance system. This evaluation found a high incidence of drug-associated hypoglycemia in a general NH population. Future studies are needed to determine the potential benefits of use of a surveillance system in real-time detection and management of hypoglycemia in NHs.

Sliding Scale Insulin vs Basal-Bolus Insulin Therapy in Long-Term Care: A 21-Day Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Efficacy, Safety and Feasibility

INTRODUCTION

Sliding scale insulin (SSI) therapy remains a common means of insulin therapy in long-term care (LTC) for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus, despite current recommendations not supportive of the form of therapy today. Lack of randomized trial data on the efficacy and safety of basal-bolus insulin (B-BI) therapy in nursing home residents may have precluded this form of insulin administration in the LTC setting. Our study is a comparison of the efficacy of SSI (control) and B-BI (intervention) therapies during a 21-day intervention trial in older nursing home residents.

METHODS

Fourteen LTC facilities in the US participated; 110 residents with type 2 diabetes volunteered to participate; 35 failed inclusion criteria, 75 signed informed written consent, and 11 were discharged to home/hospital or withdrew consent; data from 64 participants are reported. Recent fasting blood glucose (FBG), hemoglobin A1c, and chemistries were obtained. Four glucose readings (prior to breakfast, lunch, dinner, and bedtime), oral antiglycemic drug, and insulin doses and changes, and all adverse events/serious adverse events, both those related to glucose control [hypoglycemic (<70 mg/dL) and hyperglycemic (>200 mg/dL) episodes] and those unrelated, were recorded daily. Patients were randomized to either remain on SSI or be shifted to the B-BI group.

RESULTS

Nursing home residents 80 ± 8 (standard deviation) years, 66% female participated; Control and Intervention participants had similar age, gender, race distributions, comorbidity, and 3-day average pretrial FBG levels (all P > .05). At study end, B-BI volunteers had significantly lower 3-day average FBG levels vs pretrial (P = .0231) while SSI participants had no change in 3-day average FBG (P > .05). During the trial, participants from both groups had similar rates of hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, other adverse events, and hospitalizations (serious adverse events) unrelated to glucose control (all P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

B-BI therapy produced significantly lower average FBG levels after 21 days compared with SSI therapy; both groups had similar rates of hypo- and hyperglycemia. Switching to B-BI therapy is feasible, safe, and effective in the LTC setting.

A randomized controlled trial comparing treatment with oral agents and basal insulin in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes in long-term care facilities

BACKGROUND

Managing hyperglycemia and diabetes is challenging in geriatric patients admitted to long-term care (LTC) facilities.

METHODS

This randomized control trial enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with blood glucose (BG) >180 mg/dL or glycated hemoglobin >7.5% to receive low-dose basal insulin (glargine, starting dose 0.1 U/kg/day) or oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) therapy as per primary care provider discretion for 26 weeks. Both groups received supplemental rapid-acting insulin before meals for BG >200 mg/dL. Primary end point was difference in glycemic control as measured by fasting and mean daily glucose concentration between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients (age: 79±8 years, body mass index: 30.1±6.5 kg/m(2), duration of diabetes mellitus: 8.2±5.1 years, randomization BG: 194±97 mg/dL) were randomized to basal insulin (n=75) and OAD therapy (n=75). There were no differences in the mean fasting BG (131±27 mg/dL vs 123±23 mg/dL, p=0.06) between insulin and OAD groups, but patients treated with insulin had greater mean daily BG (163±39 mg/dL vs 138±27 mg/dL, p<0.001) compared to those treated with OADs. There were no differences in the rate of hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) between insulin (27%) and OAD (31%) groups, p=0.58. In addition, there were no differences in the number of hospital complications, emergency room visits, and mortality between treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this randomized study indicate that elderly patients with T2D in LTC facilities exhibited similar glycemic control, hypoglycemic events and complications when treated with either basal insulin or with oral antidiabetic drugs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01131052.

Use of basal insulin and the associated clinical outcomes among elderly nursing home residents with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a retrospective chart review study

BACKGROUND

The management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in long-term care (LTC) settings can be complex as a result of age-related complications. Despite guideline recommendations, sliding scale insulin remains commonplace in the LTC setting and data on basal insulin use are lacking.

METHODS

This retrospective study used medical chart data and the Minimum Data Set from elderly LTC facility patients who received basal insulin (insulin glargine, insulin detemir, or neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin) for the treatment of diabetes, to investigate the practice patterns and associated clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 2,096 elderly, insulin-treated patients in LTC were identified, with 59.5% of them (N=1,247) receiving basal insulin. Of these, more than 50% of patients received sliding scale insulin in co-administration with basal insulin. Despite its ease of use, insulin pen use was very low, at 14.6%. Significant differences were observed between the basal insulin groups for glycated hemoglobin level and dosing frequency. Hypoglycemia was uncommon -17.2% of patients experienced at least one event, and there was no significant difference in the prevalence of hypoglycemia between the groups.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest the underutilization of basal insulin in the LTC setting and worryingly high combinational use with sliding scale insulin. Differences in glycated hemoglobin and dosing frequencies between types of basal insulin warrant further comparative effectiveness studies.