Implementation of a New Intravenous Insulin Method on Intermediate-Care Units in Hospitalized Patients

Community health worker encounter forms: a tool to guide and document patient visits and worker performance

OBJECTIVES

We explored the benefits of using community health worker (CHW) encounter forms to collect data on patient interactions and assessed the effectiveness of these forms in guiding and directing interactions.

METHODS

A 1-page standardized encounter form was developed to document topics discussed during visits with diabetes patients. A portion of the form was designed to be used as a script to guide the interaction and assist patients in setting appropriate self-management goals. Data were also collected via CHW work logs and interviews with CHWs and their supervisors to validate findings.

RESULTS

Data were collected for 1198 interactions with 540 patients at 6 community health centers. Self-management goals were set during 62% of encounters. With respect to the most recent self-management goal set, patients who had set a challenging goal were more likely to be in the action stage of change than in other stages. Work logs revealed that CHWs engaged in a number of activities not involving direct patient interactions and thus not captured on encounter forms.

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluating and monitoring CHWs' daily activities has been challenging. Encounter forms have great potential for documenting the work of CHWs with patients.

Nurses' perceptions of glycemic control in patients who have undergone cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND/SIGNIFICANCE

Previous work investigating the effect of glycemic control in patients who underwent cardiac surgery has demonstrated that obtaining and maintaining blood glucose values between 80 and 120 is imperative in achieving excellent clinical outcomes in a patient who have undergone cardiac surgery. However, the caregiver's workload associated with meeting this goal is only now beginning to be understood.

METHODS

This qualitative study used focus groups held on 3 consecutive days to interview nurses in the cardiovascular intensive care unit and cardiovascular step-down unit about their thoughts on glycemic control.Three research questions were developed to help guide the focus group discussions.

RESULTS

Ten nurses, 3 from cardiovascular intensive care unit and 7 from cardiovascular step-down unit, participated in the focus groups and saturation was accomplished. The essence of the nurses' message was that they recognize glycemic control as a very important part of their patient care. However, to be able to perform this intervention, they need available equipment, a designated person to obtain all blood glucose values, periodic updates on patient outcomes related to glycemic control, and a less intrusive way to draw the patients' blood.

CONCLUSION

The ability of the nurses to obtain glycemic control is hindered by the lack of time, lack of necessary resources/equipment, lack of knowledge about the long-term outcomes resulting from glycemic control, and the discomfort to patients caused by the frequent blood draws. Hospitals need to investigate alternative mechanisms that will assist the nurse in meeting this goal.

Managing hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients

Insulin infusion is used in the critical care setting for prevention of hyperglycemia and is administered most safely under a structured, dynamic, dose-defining algorithm. The ordering of basal-prandial-correction SC insulin therapy, appropriate for most hospitalized patients who are eating, is simplified and standardized to excellence by the development of institutional order sets or computerized order entry templates. Basal insulin therapy is prescribed as intermediate-acting insulin or long-acting insulin analogue. Prandial insulin therapy is delivered with meals to prevent excessive glycemic excursions from occurring after ingestion of meals and is prescribed as rapid-acting insulin analogue. Correction-dose insulin therapy is ordered as small doses of rapid-acting insulin analogue delivered to correct hyperglycemia and is prescribed with appropriate timing so as to avoid stacking with previously administered doses of rapid-acting insulin analogue. Patients knowledgeable in diabetes self-management will experience satisfaction under an institutional policy that allows self-management to continue under appropriate conditions during hospitalization. To craft appropriate institutional tools for patient care, the input and consensus of a multidisciplinary group of health care professionals, including primary care providers and hospitalists, as well as specialists in diabetes with backgrounds in endocrinology, nutrition and dietetics, nursing, pharmacy, laboratory sciences, and quality assurance, is required.

Insulin infusion protocols for critically ill patients: a highlight of differences and similarities

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the major differences and similarities among the currently published insulin infusion protocols (IIPs) for critically ill patients.

METHODS

IIPs were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The reference lists for all retrieved protocols were also reviewed to identify any IIPs that were not surfaced with use of our initial search strategies. The major differences and similarities among the IIPs were identified and examined. In addition, strategies for successful implementation of IIPs were outlined.

RESULTS

Our search strategies retrieved 17 IIPs. Currently, no published studies have compared one insulin protocol with another. The major differences or similarities among the published IIPs were in the following areas: patient characteristics, target glucose level, time to achieve target glucose level, incidence of hypoglycemia, rationale for adjusting the rates of insulin infusion, and methods of blood glucose measurements. Because of variations in the definition of hypoglycemia, methods of blood glucose measurement, and types of blood samples used, some comparisons across the protocols were difficult. Use of a multidisciplinary team and gaining administrative support are crucial for addressing issues and provision of necessary resources for implementing a protocol for "tight" glycemic control in critically ill patients.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians should evaluate the type of patients in their critical care units, the mean baseline glucose levels, and the available resources to determine the most appropriate and practical IIP for their institution.

Practical aspects of intensive insulinization in the intensive care unit

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Strategies used for intensive insulin therapy of critically ill patients and differences of approach according to medical condition are reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Acceptance of proposed glycemic targets for critically ill patients has been tempered by uncertainties about benefit of strict glycemic control for specific target subpopulations, differences between treatment centers, optimal timing and duration of intervention, and safety. Present-day intravenous insulin infusion protocols may perform well only for restricted populations. Assessment of protocol performance requires knowledge of algorithm behavior on or near the narrow target range and, using the patient as unit of observation, examination of glycemic variability. Systems of the future will permit adjustment of algorithm parameters to meet individual- or population-specific targets and match carbohydrate exposure.

SUMMARY

Attainment and preservation of glycemic control among critically ill patients are best attempted with intravenous insulin infusion. Advances in the design of decision support and insulin delivery systems, and progress in the technology of continuous blood glucose monitoring, are likely to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia, without compromise of target range control, such that the patient outcomes enjoyed by experienced centers in the future will prove generalizable to others through the extension of new technologies.

Performance of a dose-defining insulin infusion protocol among trauma service intensive care unit admissions

BACKGROUND

Among critically ill patients, glycemic control reduces mortality and morbidities, but the use of intravenous insulin infusion is complicated by hypoglycemia. Having a standardized algorithm increases the likelihood of effective and safe utilization of intravenous insulin therapy. A tabular dose-defining protocol for intravenous insulin infusion is described, containing design elements intended to minimize risk for hypoglycemia while seeking control in a narrow target range, and performance is evaluated among critically ill trauma service patients.

METHODS

The protocol assigns insulin infusion rate (IR) for ranges of blood glucose (BG). The columns are arranged in order of increasing maintenance rate (MR) for insulin infusion. Patient column assignment is determined according to rate of change of BG. During stable column assignment, the IR is a function of column MR and BG. Within-column, the protocol formula provides that (a) for BG between 70 mg/dL and target BG, the IR increases exponentially to the column MR; and (b) for BG above upper target BG range, the IR increases linearly as an adaptation of the rule of 1800, with slope determined by the column MR. Values for IR calculated by formula are rounded to correspond to BG ranges of the table. Performance was assessed in 27 sequential runs among 24 trauma service patients admitted to a surgical intensive care unit (2004-2005).

RESULTS

Using point-of-care measurements, mean preinfusion BG was 230.0 +/- 67.9 mg/dL. BG < 140 mg/dL was reached during all 27 runs (median time 5.0 h), and target BG was < 110 mg/dL during 25 runs (median time 11.0 h). For the group of runs attaining target before interruption of insulin infusion, the average +/- SD of the principal measure of glycemic control, the within-run mean BG, was 113.7 +/- 14.8 mg/dL (coefficient of variation 13%, n = 25 runs). After attaining target, the average within-run SD for BG was 22.9 mg/dL. The within-run frequency of hypoglycemic measurements (BG < 70 mg/dL) as a percentage of BG determinations was 2.4%. In this series, no instance of BG <50 mg/dL was seen.

CONCLUSIONS

This report describes a nurse-implemented tabular protocol for intravenous insulin infusion having the advantages of efficacy, safety, and simplicity of use. Wide variability of IR in the neighborhood of BG 110 mg/dL is associated with stable BG response, and protection against hypoglycemia is achieved by rapid decline of IR at BGs in or below the target range.

Improving Inpatient Diabetes Care: Nursing Issues

As the epidemic of diabetes continues to escalate, the number of patients with diabetes who are hospitalized also will grow. Current evidence shows the value of good glycemic control in reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes. Nurses will increasingly be called on to provide the majority of the hospitalized care for these patients, and to implement care strategies that are safe, efficient, and effective. This article lists barriers faced by nurses in the inpatient setting when providing care to patients with diabetes and hyperglycemia, describes certain strategies that have successfully overcome these barriers, and suggests other strategies for testing.

No Patient Left Behind: Evaluation and Design of Intravenous Insulin Infusion Algorithms

OBJECTIVE

To define the characteristics of performance evaluation, algorithm design, and regulation of insulin delivery by which professionals and the healthcare system might differentiate between methodologies for intravenous insulin infusion.

METHODS

Published performance criteria used in the assessment of intravenous insulin infusion algorithms are classified. The structure of intravenous insulin infusion formulae is reviewed, as are technologies that might lead to future improvement.

RESULTS

Among published reports, no standardization was discernable for description of algorithm characteristics or performance. Except for time-to-target and hypoglycemic episodes, measures using the patient as unit of observation are not employed consistently.

CONCLUSION

The healthcare system needs criteria for evaluation and minimal acceptable standards for assessing performance of any algorithm, decision support system, or closed-loop system for intravenous insulin infusion. Inclusion of patient-based measures is necessary to assess the ability of an algorithm to control variability between patients and within a given run. Standardization of performance reporting will help users to select appropriate methodologies.