Beliefs about hospital diabetes and perceived barriers to glucose management among inpatient midlevel practitioners

Healthcare professionals' competencies and confidence in managing hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

In hospitals, 15%-20% of patients have diabetes. Therefore, all healthcare professionals (HCPs) must have a basic knowledge of in-hospital diabetes management. This survey assessed the knowledge of diabetes among HCPs in Denmark.

METHODS

A 27-item questionnaire was developed and reviewed independently before the survey was distributed. The questionnaire contained seven baseline questions on the HCPs' current workplace, educational level, usual shift routines and years of experience, 18 multiple-choice questions and 2 cases.

RESULTS

A total of 252 completed questionnaires were returned by 133 (52.8%) physicians, 101 (40.1%) nurses and 18 (7.1%) healthcare assistants. HCPs answered 50% of the questions correctly. Having experience from endocrinological departments increased the correct response score (0%-100%) by 6.2% points (95% CI 0.3-12.1) (p = 0.039) and 3.1% points (95% CI 1.5-4.7) for every increase in confidence level on a scale from 1 to 10 (p < 0.001). HCPs scored 8 out of 10 on a confidence level scale on average. In a fictive case, 50% of HCPs administered the correct bolus insulin dose. Hyperglycaemia (>10.0 mmol/L) and hypoglycaemia (<3.9 mmol/L) were correctly identified by around 40% of HCPs. Hypoglycaemia was rated more important than hyperglycaemia by most HCPs.

CONCLUSION

Significant gaps in identifying hypo- and hyperglycaemia and correct administration of bolus insulin have been identified, which could be targeted in future education for HCPs. HCPs answered 50% of questions related to in-hospital diabetes management correctly. Experience from endocrinological departments and self-rated confidence levels are associated with HCPs' in-hospital diabetes competencies.

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in a non-Icu hospital setting: The patient's journey

AIMS

Although consistent data support the outpatient use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to improve glycemic control and reduce hypoglycemic burden, and clinical outcomes, there are limited data regarding its use in the hospital setting, particularly in the non-intensive care unit (non-ICU) setting. The emerging use of CGM in the non-critical care setting may be useful in increasing the efficiency of hospital care and reducing the length of stay for patients with diabetes while improving glycemic control.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The purpose of this Expert Opinion paper was to evaluate the state of the art and provide a practical model of how CGM can be implemented in the hospital.

SETTING

A patient's CGM journey from admission to the ward to the application of the sensor, from patient education on the device during hospitalization until discharge of the patient to maintain remote control.

CONCLUSIONS

This practical approach for the implementation and management of CGM in patients with diabetes admitted to non-ICUs could guide hospitals in their diabetes management initiatives using CGM, helping to identify patients most likely to benefit and suggesting how this technology can be implemented to maximize clinical benefits.

Development and Validation of a Machine Learning Model to Predict Near-Term Risk of Iatrogenic Hypoglycemia in Hospitalized Patients

Importance

Accurate clinical decision support tools are needed to identify patients at risk for iatrogenic hypoglycemia, a potentially serious adverse event, throughout hospitalization.

Objective

To predict the risk of iatrogenic hypoglycemia within 24 hours after each blood glucose (BG) measurement during hospitalization using a machine learning model.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study, conducted at 5 hospitals within the Johns Hopkins Health System, included 54 978 admissions of 35 147 inpatients who had at least 4 BG measurements and received at least 1 U of insulin during hospitalization between December 1, 2014, and July 31, 2018. Data from the largest hospital were split into a 70% training set and 30% test set. A stochastic gradient boosting machine learning model was developed using the training set and validated on internal and external validation.

Exposures

A total of 43 clinical predictors of iatrogenic hypoglycemia were extracted from the electronic medical record, including demographic characteristics, diagnoses, procedures, laboratory data, medications, orders, anthropomorphometric data, and vital signs.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Iatrogenic hypoglycemia was defined as a BG measurement less than or equal to 70 mg/dL occurring within the pharmacologic duration of action of administered insulin, sulfonylurea, or meglitinide.

Results

This cohort study included 54 978 admissions (35 147 inpatients; median [interquartile range] age, 66.0 [56.0-75.0] years; 27 781 [50.5%] male; 30 429 [55.3%] White) from 5 hospitals. Of 1 612 425 index BG measurements, 50 354 (3.1%) were followed by iatrogenic hypoglycemia in the subsequent 24 hours. On internal validation, the model achieved a C statistic of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.89-0.90), a positive predictive value of 0.09 (95% CI, 0.08-0.09), a positive likelihood ratio of 4.67 (95% CI, 4.59-4.74), a negative predictive value of 1.00 (95% CI, 1.00-1.00), and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.22 (95% CI, 0.21-0.23). On external validation, the model achieved C statistics ranging from 0.86 to 0.88, positive predictive values ranging from 0.12 to 0.13, negative predictive values of 0.99, positive likelihood ratios ranging from 3.09 to 3.89, and negative likelihood ratios ranging from 0.23 to 0.25. Basal insulin dose, coefficient of variation of BG, and previous hypoglycemic episodes were the strongest predictors.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that iatrogenic hypoglycemia can be predicted in a short-term prediction horizon after each BG measurement during hospitalization. Further studies are needed to translate this model into a real-time informatics alert and evaluate its effectiveness in reducing the incidence of inpatient iatrogenic hypoglycemia.

Clinical decision support to improve management of diabetes and dysglycemia in the hospital: a path to optimizing practice and outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Innovative approaches are needed to design robust clinical decision support (CDS) to optimize hospital glycemic management. We piloted an electronic medical record (EMR), evidence-based algorithmic CDS tool in an academic center to alert clinicians in real time about gaps in care related to inpatient glucose control and insulin utilization, and to provide management recommendations.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The tool was designed to identify clinical situations in need for action: (1) severe or recurrent hyperglycemia in patients with diabetes: blood glucose (BG) ≥13.88 mmol/L (250 mg/dL) at least once or BG ≥10.0 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) at least twice, respectively; (2) recurrent hyperglycemia in patients with stress hyperglycemia: BG ≥10.0 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) at least twice; (3) impending or established hypoglycemia: BG 3.9-4.4 mmol/L (70-80 mg/dL) or ≤3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL); and (4) inappropriate sliding scale insulin (SSI) monotherapy in recurrent hyperglycemia, or anytime in patients with type 1 diabetes. The EMR CDS was active (ON) for 6 months for all adult hospital patients and inactive (OFF) for 6 months. We prospectively identified and compared gaps in care between ON and OFF periods.

RESULTS

When active, the hospital CDS tool significantly reduced events of recurrent hyperglycemia in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (3342 vs 3701, OR=0.88, p=0.050) and in patients with stress hyperglycemia (288 vs 506, OR=0.60, p<0.001). Hypoglycemia or impending hypoglycemia (1548 vs 1349, OR=1.15, p=0.050) were unrelated to the CDS tool on subsequent analysis. Inappropriate use of SSI monotherapy in type 1 diabetes (10 vs 22, OR=0.36, p=0.073), inappropriate use of SSI monotherapy in type 2 diabetes (2519 vs 2748, OR=0.97, p=0.632), and in stress hyperglycemia subjects (1617 vs 1488, OR=1.30, p<0.001) were recognized.

CONCLUSION

EMR CDS was successful in reducing hyperglycemic events among hospitalized patients with dysglycemia and diabetes, and inappropriate insulin use in patients with type 1 diabetes.

The effect of hypoglycaemia during hospital admission on health-related outcomes for people with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To assess the health-related outcomes of hypoglycaemia for people with diabetes admitted to hospital; specifically, hospital length of stay and mortality.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies relating to hypoglycaemia (< 4 mmol/l) for hospitalized adults (≥ 16 years) with diabetes reporting the primary outcomes of interest, hospital length of stay or mortality. Final papers for inclusion were reviewed in duplicate and the adjusted results of each were pooled, using a random effects model then undergoing further prespecified subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 15 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean difference in length of stay for ward-based inpatients exposed to hypoglycaemia was 4.1 days longer [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.36 to 5.79; I² = 99%] compared with those without hypoglycaemia. This association remained robust across the pre-specified subgroup analyses. The pooled relative risk (RR) of in-hospital mortality was greater for those exposed to hypoglycaemia (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.64 to 2.67; I² = 94%, n = 7 studies) but not in intensive care unit mortality (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.16; I² =0%, n = 2 studies).

CONCLUSION

There is an association between inpatient hypoglycaemia and longer length of stay and greater in-hospital mortality. Studies examining this association were heterogenous in terms of both clinical populations and effect size, but the overall direction of the association was consistent. Therefore, glucose concentration should be considered a potential tool to aid the identification of inpatients at risk of poor health-related outcomes.

Closing the Loop: Optimizing Diabetes Care in the Hospital by Addressing Dispersed Information in Electronic Health Records and Using Clinical Decision Support

Multiple factors hinder the management of diabetes in hospitals. Amid the demands of practice, health care providers must collect, collate, and analyze multiple data points to optimally interpret glucose control and manage insulin dosing. Such data points are commonly dispersed in different sections of electronic health records (EHR), and the system for data display and physician interaction with the EHR are often poorly conducive to seamless clinical decision making. In this perspective article, we examine challenges in the process of EHR data retrieval, interpretation and decision making, using glucose management as an exemplar. We propose a conceptual, systems-based design for closing the loop between data gathering, analysis and decision making in the management of inpatient diabetes. This concept capitalizes on attributes of the EHR that can enable automated recognition of cases and provision of clinical recommendations.

Overcoming barriers to diabetes care in the hospital: The power of qualitative observations to promote positive change

AIMS

Despite advocacy by diabetes societies and evidence about how to prevent the deleterious consequences of dysglycemia among hospitalized patients, deficits in clinical practice continue to present barriers to care. The purpose of this study was to examine inpatient rounding practices using a qualitative research lens to assess challenges on the care of hospitalized patients with diabetes and to develop ideas for positive changes in hospital management of diabetes and hyperglycemia.

METHODS

We conducted an interpretive analysis of qualitative observations during medical and surgical inpatient rounds at an academic institution. We coded, analysed, and reported data as thematic findings.

RESULTS

Emerging themes include omissions in discussions during rounds; unpreparedness to address diabetes or dysglycemia during rounds; identifying practice improvement opportunities to address diabetes issues: and recognizing accountability within the routine of practice.

CONCLUSIONS

This work guides clinicians and informs systems of practice about improvement strategies that can emerge from within hospital teams. These recommendations emphasize the interconnectedness of practice elements including thoughtful review of glucose status during rounds among patients with and without diabetes; fostering doctors and nurses to work in unison; promoting awareness and integration within and across disciplines; and advocating for better use of existing resources.

The practice of glycaemic control in intensive care units: A multicentre survey of nursing and medical professionals

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To determine the views of nurses and physicians working in intensive care units (ICU) about the aims of glycaemic control and use of their protocols.

BACKGROUND

Evidence about the optimal aims and methods for glycaemic control in ICU is controversial, and current local protocols guiding practice differ between ICUs, both nationally and internationally. The views of professionals on glycaemic control can influence their practice.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional, multicentre, survey-based study.

METHODS

An online short survey was sent to all physicians and nurses of seven ICUs, including questions on effective glycaemic control, treatment of hypoglycaemia and deviations from protocols' instructions. STROBE reporting guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Over half of the 40 respondents opined that a patient spending <75% admission time within the target glycaemic levels constituted poor glycaemic control. Professionals with more than 5 years of experience were more likely to rate a patient spending 50%-74% admission time within target glycaemic levels as poor than less experienced colleagues. Physicians were more likely to rate a patient spending <50% admission time within target as poor than nurses. There was general agreement on how professionals would rate most deviations from their protocols. Nurses were more likely to rate insulin infusions restarted late and incorrect dosage of rescue glucose as major deviations than physicians. Most professionals agreed on when they would treat hypoglycaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

When surveyed on various aspects of glycaemic control, ICU nurses and physicians often agreed, although there were certain areas of disagreement, in which their profession and level of experience seemed to play a role.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Differing views on glycaemic control amongst professionals may affect their practice and, thus, could lead to health inequalities. Clinical leads and the multidisciplinary ICU team should assess and, if necessary, address these differing opinions.

Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Physician-Targeted Inpatient Glycemic Management Curriculum

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes is prevalent among hospitalized patients and there are multiple challenges to attaining glycemic control in the hospital setting. We sought to develop an inpatient glycemic management curriculum with stakeholder input and to evaluate the effectiveness of this educational program on glycemic control in hospitalized patients.

METHODS

Using the Six-Step Approach of Kern to Curriculum Development for Medical Education, we developed and implemented an educational curriculum for inpatient glycemic management targeted to internal medicine residents and hospitalists. We surveyed physicians (n = 73) and conducted focus group sessions (n = 18 physicians) to solicit input regarding educational deficits and desired format of the educational intervention. Based on feedback from the surveys and focus groups, we developed educational goals and objectives and a case-based curriculum, which was delivered over a 1-year period via in-person teaching sessions by 2 experienced diabetes physicians at 3 hospitals. Rates of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia were evaluated among at-risk patient days using an interrupted time-series design.

RESULTS

We developed a mnemonic-based (SIGNAL) curriculum consisting of 10 modules, which covers key concepts of inpatient glycemic management and provides an approach to daily glycemic management: S = steroids, I = insulin, G = glucose, N = nutritional status, A = added dextrose, and L = labs. Following implementation of the curriculum, there was no difference in the rates of hyperglycemia in insulin-treated patients following the intervention; however, there was an increase in the rates of hypoglycemia defined as blood glucose (BG) ⩽ 70 mg/dL (5.6% vs 3.0%, P < .001) and clinically significant hypoglycemia defined as BG < 54 mg/dL (1.9% vs 0.8%, P = .01). There was poor penetration of the curriculum, with 60%, 20%, and 90% of the learning modules being delivered at the three participating hospitals, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this pilot study, a physician-targeted educational curriculum was not associated with improved glycemic control. Adapting the intervention to increase penetration and integrating the curriculum into existing clinical decision support tools may improve the effectiveness of the educational program on glycemic outcomes.

Glucometrics and Insulinometrics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Glucometrics is the systematic analysis of inpatient glucose data and is of key interest as hospitals strive to improve inpatient glycemic control. Insulinometrics is the systematic analysis and reporting of inpatient insulin therapy. This paper reviews some of the questions to be resolved before a national benchmarking process can be developed that will allow institutions to track and compare inpatient glucose control performance against established guidelines.

RECENT FINDINGS

There remains a lack of standardization on how glucometircs should be measured and reported. Before hospitals can commit resources to compiling and extracting data, consensus must be reached on such questions as which measures to report, definitions of glycemic targets, and how data should be obtained. Examples are provided on how insulin administration can be measured and reported. Hospitals should begin assessment of glucometrics and insulinometrics. However, consensus and standardization must first occur to allow for a national benchmarking process.

PERSPECTIVES ON LEARNING AND CLINICAL PRACTICE IMPROVEMENT FOR DIABETES IN THE HOSPITAL: A REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL INTERVENTIONS FOR PROVIDERS

OBJECTIVE

The management of inpatient hyperglycemia and diabetes requires expertise among many health-care providers. There is limited evidence about how education for healthcare providers can result in optimization of clinical outcomes. The purpose of this critical review of the literature is to examine methods and outcomes related to educational interventions regarding the management of diabetes and dysglycemia in the hospital setting. This report provides recommendations to advance learning, curricular planning, and clinical practice.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search through PubMed Medical for terms related to concepts of glycemic management in the hospital and medical education and training. This search yielded 1,493 articles published between 2003 and 2016.

RESULTS

The selection process resulted in 16 original articles encompassing 1,123 learners from various disciplines. We categorized findings corresponding to learning outcomes and patient care outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Based on the analysis, we propose the following perspectives, leveraging learning and clinical practice that can advance the care of patients with diabetes and/or dysglycemia in the hospital. These include: (1) application of knowledge related to inpatient glycemic management can be improved with active, situated, and participatory interactions of learners in the workplace; (2) instruction about inpatient glycemic management needs to reach a larger population of learners; (3) management of dysglycemia in the hospital may benefit from the integration of clinical decision support strategies; and (4) education should be adopted as a formal component of hospitals' quality planning, aiming to integrate clinical practice guidelines and to optimize diabetes care in hospitals.

Perceptions, Barriers, and Knowledge of Inpatient Glycemic Control

Objectives:

To assess knowledge and perceptions of health care workers regarding optimal care for patients with hyperglycemia and identify commonly perceived barriers for the development of a hospital-wide education program.

Research Design and Methods:

A cross-sectional design was utilized to survey health care workers involved in managing hyperglycemia in an urban, community teaching hospital. Each health care worker received a survey specific to their health care role.

Results:

Approximately 50% of questions about best clinical practices were answered correctly. Correct responses varied across disciplines (n, mean ± standard deviation [SD]), that is, physicians (n = 112, 53% ± 26%), nurses (n = 43, 52% ± 35%), pharmacists (n = 20, 64% ± 23%), dietitians (n = 5, 48% ± 30%), and patient care assistants (n = 12, 38% ± 34%). Most health care workers perceived hyperglycemia treatment to be very important and that sliding scale insulin was commonly used because of convenience but not efficacy.

Conclusion:

Knowledge regarding hyperglycemia management was suboptimal across a sample of health care workers when compared to clinical best practices. Hyperglycemia management was perceived to be important but convenience seemed to influence the management approach more than efficacy. Knowledge, perceptions, and barriers seem to play an important role in patient care and should be considered when developing education programs prior to implementation of optimized glycemic protocols.

Resource utilization and costs associated with using insulin therapy within a newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus population

BACKGROUND

Although oral antidiabetic medications are the mainstay for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), patients often require insulin therapy to achieve optimal glycemic control. Given the prevalence of insulin use among patients with T2DM, this study evaluated the economic impact of this treatment modality in patients treated in a managed care setting.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate costs and resource utilization associated with using insulin therapy among patients with newly diagnosed T2DM who were initially treated with other noninsulin antidiabetic (NIAD) medications.

METHODS

An observational, retrospective study design was implemented using integrated medical and pharmacy claims data. Adults with a diagnosis of T2DM from July 1, 2003, through March 31, 2008, were identified. The date of first diagnosis was deemed the index date. The 24-month period after the index date was used to assess treatment patterns. Based on the treatment patterns, the following 2 cohorts were selected: NIAD-only cohort, users who received greater than 1 NIAD class medication but never received insulin, and insulin-use cohort, NIAD users who switched to/added on insulin therapy (duration ≥ 60 days). Patients were matched in a 1:3 (insulin-use:NIAD-only) ratio based on propensity scores and other key covariates of interest. Hypoglycemia rates, monthly costs, and resource use during the outcome assessment period were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

After matching, 1,400 patients (350 insulin users and 1,050 NIAD-only users) were included in the analysis (42% women; mean age, 56 years). After controlling for covariates, the insulin-use cohort incurred $71 per patient per month higher total T2DM-specific costs than the NIAD-only cohort ($241/month vs. $170/month, P = 0.0003). Pharmacy costs and utilization of physician visits were drivers of cost differences between cohorts. The rate of hypoglycemic events was 10.2 per 100 person-years for the insulin-use cohort versus 2.9 per 100 person-years in the NIAD-only cohort (P  less than  0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of insulin therapy is associated with increased hypoglycemic events, increased pharmacy and medical costs, and greater utilization of T2DM-specific health care services.

Implementation of subcutaneous insulin protocol for non-critically ill hospitalized patients in andalusian tertiary care hospitals

INTRODUCTION

In 2009, the Andalusian Society of Endocrinology and Nutrition designed a protocol for subcutaneous insulin treatment in hospitalized non-critically ill patients (HIP).

OBJECTIVE

To analyze implementation of HIP at tertiary care hospitals from the Andalusian Public Health System.

METHOD

A descriptive, multicenter study conducted in 8 tertiary care hospitals on a random sample of non-critically ill patients with diabetes/hyperglycemia (n=306) hospitalized for ≥48 hours in 5 non-surgical (SM) and 2 surgical (SQ) departments. Type 1 and other specific types of diabetes, pregnancy and nutritional support were exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

288 patients were included for analysis (62.5% males; 70.3±10.3 years; 71.5% SM, 28.5% SQ). A scheduled subcutaneous insulin regimen based on basal-bolus-correction protocol was started in 55.9% (95%CI: 50.5-61.2%) of patients, 63.1% SM vs. 37.8% SQ (P<.05). Alternatives to insulin regimen based on basal-bolus-correction included sliding scale insulin (43.7%), diet (31.3%), oral antidiabetic drugs (17.2%), premixed insulin (1.6%), and others (6.2%). For patients previously on oral antidiabetic drugs, in-hospital insulin dose was 0.32±0.1 IU/kg/day. In patients previously on insulin, in-hospital insulin dose was increased by 17% [-13-53], and in those on insulin plus oral antidiabetic drugs, in-hospital insulin dose was increased by 26.4% [-6-100]. Supplemental insulin doses used for<40 IU/day and 40-80 IU/day were 72.2% and 56.7% respectively. HbA1c was measured in 23.6% of patients (95CI%: 18.8-28.8); 27.7% SM vs. 13.3% SQ (P<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies are needed to improve implementation of the inpatient subcutaneous insulin protocol, particularly in surgical departments. Sliding scale insulin is still the most common alternative to insulin regimen based on basal-bolus-correction scheduled insulin. Metabolic control assessment during hospitalization should be encouraged.

Glycemic control in cardiac surgery: implementing an evidence-based insulin infusion protocol

BACKGROUND

Acute hyperglycemia following cardiac surgery increases the risk of deep sternal wound infection, significant early morbidity, and mortality. Insulin infusion protocols that target tight glycemic control to treat hyperglycemia have been linked to hypoglycemia and increased mortality. Recently published studies examining glycemic control in critical illness and clinical practice guidelines from professional organizations support moderate glycemic control.

OBJECTIVES

To measure critical care nurses' knowledge of glycemic control in cardiac surgery before and after education. To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an evidence-based insulin infusion protocol targeting moderate glycemic control in cardiac surgery patients.

METHODS

This evidence-based practice change was implemented in the cardiovascular unit in a community teaching hospital. Nurses completed a self-developed questionnaire to measure knowledge of glycemic control. Blood glucose data, collected (retrospectively) from anesthesia end time through 11:59 PM on postoperative day 2, were compared from 2 months before to 2 months after the practice change.

RESULTS

Nurses' knowledge (test scores) increased significantly after education (pretest mean = 53.10, SD = 11.75; posttest mean = 79.10, SD = 12.02; t54 = -8.18, P < .001). Mean blood glucose level after implementation was 148 mg/dL. The incidence of hypoglycemia, 2.09% before and 0.22% after the intervention, was significantly reduced ( $${\hbox{ \chi }}_{1}^{2}$$ [n = 29] = 13.9, P < .001). The percentage of blood glucose levels less than 180 mg/dL was 88.30%.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing nurses' knowledge of glycemic control and implementing an insulin infusion protocol targeting moderate glycemic control were effective for treating acute hyperglycemia following cardiac surgery with decreased incidence of hypoglycemia.

Understanding hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients

Controlling blood glucose in hospitalized patients is important as both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia are associated with increased cost, length of stay, morbidity and mortality. A limiting factor in stringent control is the concern of iatrogenic hypoglycemia. The association of hypoglycemia with mortality has led to clinical guideline changes recommending more conservative glycemic control than had previously been suggested, with the use of patient specific approaches when appropriate. Healthier, stable patients may be managed with stricter control while the elderly and severely ill may be managed less aggressively. While the avoidance of hypoglycemia is essential in clinical practice, recent studies suggest that a higher mortality rate occurs in spontaneous rather than iatrogenic hypoglycemia. Therefore, inpatient hypoglycemia may be viewed more as a biomarker of disease rather than a true cause of fatality.

[Management of inpatient glucose in non-critical care setting: impact of a proactive intervention based on a point-of-care of system with remote viewing of capillary blood glucose]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The management of hyperglycemia in conventional wards is suboptimal. The objective of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of a proactive intervention supported by point-of-care system with remote viewing of capillary blood glucose (CBG) on glycemic control as compared to usual care in non-critical surgical patients.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Two sequential periods of 2 months were defined. In the first phase (control, CPh), in which the surgical team was in charge of glycemic control, capillary glucose levels were recorded by StatStrip(®) system, and endocrinological support was provided upon surgeons request. In a second phase (intervention, IPh), the endocrinologist proceeded based on remotely-viewed CBG values. We compared the use of basal-bolus therapy and the degree of glycemic control between the 2 study periods.

RESULTS

The IPh was associated with greater use of basal-bolus regimens (21.4 vs. 58.3%; P=.003). The average CBG during the CPh was 161 ± 64 vs. 142 ± 48 mg/dL during the IPh (P<.001). The IPh was associated with an increased frequency of CBG determinations between 70-140 mg/dL (CPh: 41.8 vs. IPh: 52.5%; P<.001), lower frequency of ≥ 250 mg/dL CBG determinations (CPh: 9 vs. IPh: 3.5%; P<.001), with no increase in the frequency of hypoglycemia (CPh: 3 vs. IPh: 3.7%; P=.39).

CONCLUSIONS

A proactive endocrine intervention facilitated by a point-of-care system with remote viewing of CBG is associated with improved glycemic control in non-critical patients, without any further increase in the number of hypoglycaemic recordings.

Building a Novel Inpatient Diabetes Management Mentor Program

The intent of this project was to create a formalized educational program for bedside nurses responsible for inpatient diabetes management. Bedside nurses are recruited to serve as diabetes management mentors. The mentors receive advanced education concerning teaching and learning principles, the AADE7™ Self-Care Behaviors, and diabetes management strategies. They teach their peers, advocate for patients, and facilitate referrals for outpatient Diabetes Self-Management Education (DSME) programs. The focus of these ongoing educational activities is to foster the development of diabetes management mentors and to create teaching tools that mentors can use with peers to address practice gaps or skill deficiencies. The diabetes management mentor is integral in enhancing the care of patients with diabetes in the hospital. The empowerment of bedside nurses as mentors for their peers and their patients is an invaluable asset that helps nurses take ownership of their practice. This role could be applied to other complex disease entities, helping nurses to develop specific management skills to improve patient outcomes and enhance patient satisfaction.

Hypoglycemia in non-critically ill, hospitalized patients with diabetes: evaluation, prevention, and management

Hypoglycemia among hospitalized patients with diabetes is a common problem. Of the > 8 million patients admitted to US hospitals annually with a diagnosis of diabetes, up to 25% may have a low blood glucose level during hospitalization. As a widely recognized cause of acute, potentially fatal events, hypoglycemia remains a significant barrier to optimal inpatient glycemic control. Although iatrogenic hypoglycemia is associated with adverse outcomes, it may be a marker for illness rather than causal in itself. Several factors, such as administration of exogenous insulin, mismatch of insulin administration with nutrition, and the loss of normal counterregulatory responses, place patients with diabetes at higher risk for hypoglycemia than patients without diabetes. Causes and predictors of hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients with diabetes are discussed. Careful attention to contributing factors, responsiveness to changes in clinical status, and specific institutional protocols and policies can reduce the risk of hypoglycemia. Use of subcutaneous basal-bolus insulin dosing consistent with national guidelines and correction rather than sliding-scale insulin may minimize both hyper- and hypoglycemia. A majority of the literature on inpatient hypoglycemia has been limited to the critical-care setting. This review therefore focuses on hypoglycemia among non-critically ill inpatients with diabetes.

Durability of the effect of online diabetes training for medical residents on knowledge, confidence, and inpatient glycemia

BACKGROUND

Inpatient dysglycemia is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and cost. Medical education must not only address knowledge gaps, but also improve clinical care.

METHODS

  All 129 medicine residents at a large academic medical center were offered a case-based online curriculum on the management of inpatient dysglycemia in the fall of 2009. First-year residents took a 3-h course with 10 modules. Second and third-year residents, who had been educated the prior year, underwent abbreviated training. All residents were offered a 20-min refresher course in the spring of 2009. We assessed resident knowledge, resident confidence, and patient glycemia on two teaching wards before and after the initial intervention, as well as after the refresher course.

RESULTS

  A total of 117 residents (91%) completed the initial training; 299 analyzed admissions generated 11, 089 blood glucose values and 4799 event blood glucose values. Admissions with target glycemia increased from 19.4% to 33.0% (P = 0.035) by the end of the curriculum. There was a strong downward trend in hyperglycemia from 22.4% to 11.3% (P = 0.055) without increased hypoglycemia. Confidence and knowledge increased significantly among first-time and repeat participants. Residents rated the intervention as highly relevant to their practice and technologically well implemented.

CONCLUSION

  Optimization of an online curriculum covering the management of inpatient glycemia over the course of 2 years led to significantly more admissions in the target glycemia range. Given its scalability, modularity and applicability, this web-based educational intervention may become the standard curriculum for the management of inpatient glycemia.

Insulin order sets improve glycemic control and processes of care

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to evaluate the impact of a standardized preprinted subcutaneous correctional insulin order set on glycemic control, processes of care, and nursing satisfaction.

METHODS

This was a controlled before/after, qualitative study using focus group interviews. The intervention group consisted of patients with diabetes who were admitted to the cardiovascular surgery ward. The control group consisted of patients with diabetes who were admitted to the vascular surgery ward. Registered nurses on the cardiovascular surgery floor participated in focus groups and completed surveys. We used a multifaceted intervention including standardized insulin order sheet, educational workshops, verbal and printed reminders, printed enabler, reference sheet, and overnight helpline. Glycemic control and hypoglycemia were assessed through chart review, and nursing satisfaction with the insulin order sets was assessed through surveys and nursing focus groups, performed before and 6 months after implementation of the insulin order set.

RESULTS

There was a 39% reduction in proportion of blood glucose>11.0 mmol/L (198 mg/dL) in the intervention group compared with the control group (0.17 vs 0.28, P=.03). The proportion of hypoglycemia (blood glucose<4.0 mmol/L [72 mg/dL]) was no different between the 2 groups. Nurse satisfaction increased significantly (P<.02); order sets were easy to use and improved glycemic control, processes, and efficiency of care, and reduced the number of pages between nursing and medical staff.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardized insulin order sets reduced hyperglycemia and improved nursing satisfaction and processes of care. Successful implementation required stakeholder engagement, identification of barriers and facilitators in local practice, and tailoring the intervention to target these factors.

[Interns' viewpoints and knowledge about management of hyperglycemia in the hospital setting]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In many hospitals, adequate glycemic control is not achieved despite implementation of new insulin therapy protocols. Our aim was to assess resident physician' attitudes toward inpatient hyperglycemia, barriers to achieve optimum control, and impact on them of an insulin training program

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A questionnaire was used to assess understanding and standard management of hyperglycemia before and six months after implementation of an inpatient insulin treatment program.

RESULTS

Twenty-five interns completed the questionnaire. Glycemic control was considered "very important" in all admission situations, but was only considered "very important" in conventional hospitalization by 36% of interns. Most of these felt "comfortable" using sliding scales, but not with the basal/bolus regimen, which was the least commonly used. Perception of number of well-controlled patients and comfort and use of basal/bolus therapy increased at six months, but use of "sliding scales" remained high. The greatest difficulty reported for adequate management of hyperglycemia was the lack of knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Most residents are aware of the importance of adequate glycemic control, but cannot achieve it because of inadequate knowledge. The insulin training program led to an improved perception and applicability of basal-bolus insulin regimens. However, despite all efforts, use of sliding scales remains high. Training programs should emphasize management of hyperglycemia.

Assessing inpatient glycemic control: what are the next steps?

Despite the emergence of glucometrics (i.e., systematic analysis of data on blood glucose levels of inpatients) as a subject of high interest, there remains a lack of standardization on how glucose parameters are measured and reported. This dilemma must be resolved before a national benchmarking process can be developed that will allow institutions to track and compare inpatient glucose control performance against established guidelines and that can also be supported by quality care organizations. In this article, we review some of the questions that need to be resolved through consensus and review of the evidence, and discuss some of the limitations in analyzing and reporting inpatient glucose data that must be addressed (or at least accepted as limitations) before hospitals can commit resources to gathering, compiling, and presenting inpatient glucose statistics as a health care quality measure. Standards must include consensus on which measures to report, the unit of analysis, definitions of targets for hyperglycemia treatment, a definition of hypoglycemia, determination of how data should be gathered (from chart review or from laboratory information systems), and which type of sample (blood or point of care) should be used for analysis of glycemic control. Hospitals and/or their representatives should be included in the discussion. For inpatient glucose control to remain a focus of interest, further dialogue and consensus on the topic are needed.

Effectiveness of a computerized insulin order template in general medical inpatients with type 2 diabetes: a cluster randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether an electronic order template for basal-bolus insulin ordering improves mean blood glucose in hospitalized general medical patients with hyperglycemia and type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We randomly assigned internal medicine resident teams on acute general medical floors to the use of an electronic insulin order template or usual insulin ordering. We measured diabetes care parameters for 1 month on all patients with type 2 diabetes and blood glucose <60 mg/dl or >180 mg/dl treated by these physicians.

RESULTS

Intervention group patients (n = 65) had mean glucose of 195 ± 66 mg/dl. Control group patients (n = 63) had mean glucose of 224 ± 57 mg/dl (P = 0.004). In the intervention group, there was no increase in hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Access to a computer insulin order template was associated with improved mean glucose levels without increasing hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Outpatient-to-inpatient transition of insulin pump therapy: successes and continuing challenges

BACKGROUND

Insulin pump therapy is a complex technology prone to errors when employed in the hospital setting. When patients on insulin pump therapy require hospitalization, practitioners caring for them must decide whether to allow continued pump use. We provide the largest review regarding transitioning insulin pump therapy from the outpatient to inpatient setting.

METHOD

Records of inpatient insulin pump users were retrospectively analyzed at a metropolitan Phoenix hospital between January 2006 and December 2009. Adherence to institutional procedures on insulin pump use was assessed, glycemic control was determined, and adverse events were examined.

RESULTS

We examined records on 65 patients with insulin pumps, totaling 125 hospitalizations. Mean (standard deviation) patient age was 55 (17) years, diabetes duration was 27 (14) years, pump duration was 6 (5) years, length of hospital stay was 4.7 (6.3) days, hemoglobin A1c was 7.3 (1.3)%, 85% had type 1 diabetes mellitus, 57% were women, and 97% were white. Admissions involving insulin pumps increased (23 in 2006, 17 in 2007, 40 in 2008, and 45 in 2009). Insulin pump therapy was continued in 83 (66%) hospitalizations. Among these hospitalizations, endocrinology consultations were obtained in 89%, consent agreements were found in 83%, insulin pump order sets were completed in 89%, admission glucose was checked in 100%, and nursing assessments of pump insertion sites were documented in 89%, but bedside insulin pump flow sheets were found in only 55%. Mean glucose of 175 (57) mg/dl was not significantly different than that in hospitalizations where insulin pumps were discontinued [175 (42) mg/dl] or used intermittently [177 (7) mg/dl]. There was one instance of a pump catheter kinking; however, no other adverse events (pump site infections, mechanical pump failure, diabetic ketoacidosis) were observed, and there were no use-related fatalities.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients using insulin pumps can safely have their therapy transitioned when hospitalized. A policy on inpatient continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion use can be successfully implemented. Compliance with required procedures can be achieved, although there was room to improve adherence with some process measures. Further study is needed to determine how to optimize glycemic control when pumps are allowed during hospitalization.

Comparisons of different insulin infusion protocols: a review of recent literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update on the currently available insulin infusion protocols for treatment of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients and to discuss the major differences and similarities among them.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified a total of 26 protocols, 20 of which used manual blood-glucose calculations, and six that used computerized algorithms. The major differences and similarities among the insulin infusion protocols 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. Several computerized protocols hold promise for safer achievement of glycemic targets.

SUMMARY

Insulin infusion is the most effective method for controlling hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. Clinicians should utilize a validated insulin infusion protocol that is well tolerated, and is most appropriate and practical for their institution based on the resources that are available.

Incretin-based therapies: review of the outpatient literature with implications for use in the hospital and after discharge

A large percentage of critically ill adult inpatients have type 2 diabetes, which may be undiagnosed or uncontrolled during hospitalization. Hyperglycemia complicates the therapeutic management of inpatients and leads to adverse outcomes, and intensive glycemic control with insulin reduces morbidity and mortality. Insulin therapy, however, is labor-intensive and time-consuming. More important, long-standing protocols such as the sliding scale do not provide adequate glucose control. Although more research is needed to determine the best methods for treating hyperglycemia in-hospital, the importance of achieving better glycemic control while reducing the risk of hypoglycemia has been demonstrated. Post-discharge diabetes care is equally important, as it is essential in improving long-term outcomes after a hospital stay. Hospital care providers can play an important role in effective antihyperglycemic regimens in patients with diabetes prior to discharge. Post-discharge management is a formidable challenge because of the availability of an array of oral antidiabetes agents, including metformin, sulfonylureas, and thiazolidinediones, each with distinct therapeutic and adverse event profiles. Incretin-based therapies offer a potentially useful option for post-discharge therapy, and possibly for inpatient diabetes treatment. Incretins are effective, safe, and well-tolerated; they are easier for patients to use compared with insulin injections (eg, continual glucose monitoring is not required); and they may provide long-term improvement of cardiovascular parameters and beta-cell function. This review examines the challenges to achieving glycemic control in the hospital setting and summarizes clinical data on the efficacy and safety of incretin-based therapies in their use in the hospital and after discharge.

Patient outcomes after implementation of a protocol for inpatient insulin pump therapy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and the results of use of an inpatient insulin pump protocol (IIPP).

METHODS

In this quality improvement initiative, review of medical records of bedside capillary blood glucose (CBG) levels and pump-related adverse events was performed on 50 consecutive inpatients admitted to the hospital with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) after implementation of our IIPP. Patients were categorized in 3 groups on the basis of evidence in the medical records for IIPP in combination with inpatient diabetes service consultation (group 1; n = 34), for IIPP alone (group 2; n = 12), or for usual care (group 3; n = 4). Patients identified during hospital admission as using CSII therapy were invited to complete a satisfaction questionnaire for inpatient CSII use.

RESULTS

Mean CBG levels were similar among the 3 groups (groups 1, 2, and 3: 173 +/- 43 mg/dL versus 187 +/- 62 mg/dL versus 218 +/- 46 mg/dL, respectively). Although there were more patient-days with blood glucose >300 mg/dL in group 3 (P = .02), there were no significant group differences in the frequency of hypoglycemia (CBG <70 mg/dL). Only 1 pump malfunction and 1 infusion site problem were reported among all study patients. No serious adverse events related to CSII therapy occurred. The majority of patients (86%) reported satisfaction with their ability to continue CSII use in the hospital.

CONCLUSION

Patients using CSII as outpatients are candidates for inpatient diabetes self-management. Inexperience with these devices on the part of hospital personnel together with the limited studies of patient experience with CSII in the hospital contributes to inconsistencies in management of these patients. An IIPP provides a standardized and safe approach to the use of CSII in the hospital.

Development of computer-based training to enhance resident physician management of inpatient diabetes

BACKGROUND

Treating hyperglycemia promotes better outcomes among inpatients. Knowledge deficits about management of inpatient diabetes are prevalent among resident physicians, which may affect the care of a substantial number of these patients.

METHODS

A computer-based training (CBT) curriculum on inpatient diabetes and hyperglycemia was developed and implemented for use by resident physicians and focuses on several aspects of the management of inpatient diabetes and hyperglycemia: (1) review of importance of inpatient glucose control, (2) overview of institution-specific data, (3) triaging and initial admission actions for diabetes or hyperglycemia, (4) overview of pharmacologic management, (5) insulin-dosing calculations and ordering simulations, (6) review of existing policies and procedures, and (7) discharge planning. The curriculum was first provided as a series of lectures, then formatted and placed on the institutional intranet as a CBT program.

RESULTS

Residents began using the inpatient CBT in September 2008. By August 2009, a total of 29 residents had participated in CBT: 8 in family medicine, 12 in internal medicine, and 9 in general surgery. Most of the 29 residents confirmed that module content met stated objectives, considered the information valuable to their inpatient practices, and believed that the quality of the online modules met expectations. The majority reported that the modules took just the right amount of time to complete (typically 30 min each).

CONCLUSIONS

Improvement in inpatient diabetes care requires continuous educational efforts. The CBT format and curriculum content were well accepted by the resident physicians. Ongoing assessment must determine whether resident practice patterns are influenced by such training.

Inpatient glucose control: a glycemic survey of 126 U.S. hospitals

BACKGROUND

Despite increased awareness of the value of treating inpatient hyperglycemia, little is known about glucose control in U.S. hospitals.

METHODS

The Remote Automated Laboratory System-Plus (RALS-Plus Medical Automation Systems, Charlottesville, VA) was used to extract inpatient point-of-care bedside glucose (POC-BG) tests from 126 hospitals for the period January to December 2007. Patient-day-weighted mean POC-BG and hypoglycemia/hyperglycemia rates were calculated for intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU areas. The relationship of POC-BG levels with hospital characteristics was determined.

RESULTS

A total of 12,559,305 POC-BG measurements were analyzed: 2,935,167 from the ICU and 9,624,138 from the non-ICU. Patient-day-weighted mean POC-BG was 165 mg/dL for ICU and 166 mg/dL for non-ICU. Hospital hyperglycemia (>180 mg/dL) prevalence was 46.0% for ICU and 31.7% for non-ICU. Hospital hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) prevalence was low at 10.1% for ICU and 3.5% for non-ICU. For ICU and non-ICU there was a significant relationship between number of beds and patient-day-weighted mean POC-BG levels, with larger hospitals (> or = 400 beds) having lower patient-day weighted mean POC-BG per patient day than smaller hospitals (<200 beds, P < 0.001). Rural hospitals had higher POC-BG levels compared to urban and academic hospitals (P < 0.05), and hospitals in the West had the lowest values.

CONCLUSIONS

POC-BG data captured through automated data management software can support hospital efforts to monitor the status of inpatient glycemic control. From these data, hospital hyperglycemia is common, hypoglycemia prevalence is low, and POC-BG levels vary by hospital characteristics. Increased hospital participation in data collection and reporting may facilitate the creation of a national benchmarking process for the development of best practices and improved inpatient hyperglycemia management.

Temporal and geographic patterns of hypoglycemia among hospitalized patients with diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Hypoglycemia is often cited as a barrier to achieving inpatient glycemic targets. We sought to characterize hypoglycemic events in our institution by work-shift cycle and by specific treatment area.

METHODS

Capillary (bedside) and blood (laboratory) glucose values of <70 mg/dl for patients with either a known diagnosis of diabetes or with evidence of hyperglycemia were abstracted from our laboratory database for hospitalizations between October 1, 2007, and February 3, 2008. Hypoglycemic events were analyzed by 12 h nursing work-shift cycles (day shift, 07:00 to 18:59; night shift, 19:00 to 06:59) and by the six medical, surgical, and intensive care areas in the hospital (designated areas 1 to 6).

RESULTS

We identified 206 individual patients with either diabetes or hyperglycemia (mean age, 67 years; 56% men; 83% white) who had 423 hypoglycemic events. There were 78% more hypoglycemic events during the night shift (n = 271 events in 128 individual patients) than during the day shift (n = 152 events in 96 individual patients). Most of the night-shift hypoglycemic measurements were detected between 04:00 and 04:59 or 06:00 and 06:59. The mean hypoglycemic level was comparable between shifts (p = .79) and across the six inpatient areas. The number of hypoglycemic events per person increased with lengths of hospital stay >5 days. The prevalence of hypoglycemia varied across patient care areas within the hospital, with most (28%) detected in one area of the hospital.

CONCLUSION

There are temporal and geographic patterns in the occurrence of hypoglycemia among patients with diabetes or hyperglycemia in our hospital. Further study should focus on the reasons underlying these variations so that specific interventions can address the risk of hypoglycemia during peak times and places.

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.

Perceptions of resident physicians about management of inpatient hyperglycemia in an urban hospital

BACKGROUND

Information regarding practitioner beliefs about inpatient diabetes care is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess resident physician attitudes about inpatient hyperglycemia and determine perceived barriers to optimal glycemic control in an urban hospital setting.

DESIGN

A previously developed questionnaire was modified and administered. Residents were asked about the importance of inpatient glucose control, desirable glucose ranges, and problems encountered when managing hyperglycemia.

SETTING

Urban teaching hospital.

RESULTS

Of 85 resident physicians, 66 completed the survey (mean age, 31 years; 47% men; 33% in first residency year). Most respondents categorized glucose control as "very important" in critically-ill and perioperative patients but only "somewhat important" in non-critically-ill patients. Most residents said they would target a therapeutic glucose range within the recommended levels. Most residents (88%) also said they felt "very comfortable" or "somewhat comfortable" using subcutaneous insulin therapy, whereas some were "not at all comfortable" with either subcutaneous (11%) or intravenous (18%) administration. In general, respondents were not very familiar with existing institutional policies and preprinted order sets. The most commonly reported barrier to management of inpatient hyperglycemia was lack of knowledge about appropriate insulin regimens and their use. Anxiety about hypoglycemia was only the third most frequent concern.

CONCLUSION

Most 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.

Understanding and improving management of inpatient diabetes mellitus: the Mayo Clinic Arizona experience

We present an overview of strategies our institution has taken to understand the state of its inpatient diabetes management. We first describe how we utilized information systems to assess inpatient glycemic control and insulin management in noncritically ill patients and discuss our findings regarding mean bedside glucose levels, the prevalence and frequency hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic events, the patterns of insulin therapy, and evidence of inpatient clinical inertia. We also review the development of a survey to determine practitioner attitudes and beliefs about inpatient diabetes. Results of this survey study found that, in general, practitioners believed in the importance of controlling hyperglycemia but were not comfortable with many aspects of inpatient diabetes care, particularly with the use of insulin. Finally, we suggest steps to follow in developing a quality-improvement program for hospitals.