Pharmacists' role in ensuring safe and effective hospital use of insulin

Impact of Lowered Inpatient Correctional Bedtime Insulin Dosing on Glycemic Outcomes of Veterans

Purpose: This study evaluated glycemic outcomes for hospitalized patients after reduction in bedtime correctional insulin dosing. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center analysis of a protocol change that reduced bedtime correctional insulin scale. Comparable cohorts pre- and post-protocol change were created which included patients who were ordered correctional insulin with at least 1 blood glucose (BG) reading. The primary outcome was number of nocturnal hypoglycemia readings. Secondary outcomes included, but were not limited to, mean fasting BG, BG within various ranges, and length of stay. Results: 3 percent of patients in the post-protocol change group (N = 100) experienced nocturnal hypoglycemia compared to 6% of patients in the pre-change group (N = 100) (P = .507). There were no significant differences in BG ranges <110 mg/dL, <140 mg/dL, 140 to 180 mg/dL, and >180 mg/dL. However, 19% of patients in the post-protocol change group had BG of >250 mg/dL as compared to 9% in the pre-change group (P = .033). Mean fasting BG was higher in the post-protocol change group compared to the pre-change group (156.5 mg/dL vs 139.3 mg/dL [P = .002]), as was hospital length of stay (5.17 vs 4.6 days, [P = .024]). Conclusions: A decreased bedtime correctional insulin scale had mixed results with more patients achieving goal fasting BG but also more patients experiencing BG > 250 mg/dL and longer length of stay. Larger prospective studies are required to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this type of intervention and its long-term impact.

Advanced-scope pharmacist roles in medical outpatient clinics: a cost-consequence analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a growing body of evidence that supports the clinical effectiveness of pharmacist roles in outpatient settings. However, limited studies have investigated the economic efficiency of advanced-scope outpatient pharmacist roles, particularly in the Australian setting. Assessing the overall costs and benefits of these outpatient pharmacist roles is needed to ensure service sustainability.

AIMS

To use a cost-consequence approach to evaluate the advanced-scope outpatient pharmacist roles across multiple clinic disciplines from the hospital perspective.

METHODS

A cost-consequence analysis was undertaken using data from a previous clinical-effectiveness study. All outpatient pharmacist consults conducted from 1 June 2019 to 31 May 2020 across 18 clinic disciplines were evaluated. Consequences from the pharmacist services included number of consults conducted, number of medication-related activities and number of resolved recommendations.

RESULTS

The overall cost to the hospital for the outpatient pharmacist service across all clinics was AU$1 991 122, with a potential remuneration of AU$3 895 247. There were 10 059 pharmacist consults undertaken for the 12-month period. Medication-related activities performed by pharmacists primarily included 6438 counselling and education activities and 4307 medication list activities. When the specialist pharmacist roles were added to the outpatient clinics, several health service benefits were also realised.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of pharmacist roles to outpatient clinics can increase the cost of services; however, they also can increase medication optimisation activities. Future research should examine a societal perspective that includes broader cost and effectiveness outcomes. This study could justify the implementation of advanced-scope outpatient pharmacist roles in other Australian hospitals.

Safety and Effectiveness of a Standardized Intravenous Insulin Infusion Order Set for Managing Uncontrolled Hyperglycemia Outside the Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated the administration of intravenous (IV) insulin infusions for uncontrolled hyperglycemia in non-intensive care unit (ICU) patients, and there is inadequate data to guide how to appropriately administer IV insulin infusions to this patient population.

OBJECTIVE

Determine the effectiveness and safety of our institution's non-critical care IV insulin infusion order set.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted at 2 institutions within a health care system. The primary outcome was the number of individuals who achieved a glucose level ≤180 mg/dL. For those meeting this endpoint, the time to achieving this outcome and the percentage of glucose checks within the goal range were determined. The primary safety endpoint was the number of individuals who experienced hypoglycemia (glucose level <70 mg/dL). Patients were included if they were ≥18 years of age and received the non-critical care IV insulin infusion order set outside of the ICU.

RESULTS

Twenty-one (84%) patients achieved a glucose level ≤180 mg/dL. The median (inter-quartile range [IQR]) time to achieving the primary outcome was 5.7 h (3.9-8.3). In patients who achieved the primary outcome, 41.8% of the glucose readings obtained after achieving this outcome were within goal range. Two (8%) patients experienced hypoglycemia. Both of these events occurred within 8 hours of therapy initiation and neither patient received prior doses of subcutaneous insulin. Of the 4 patients who did not achieve a glucose level ≤180 mg/dL, 2 received high-dose corticosteroids, and 3 achieved a glucose level between 181 and 200 mg/dL.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Our findings support the safe administration of IV insulin infusions to non-ICU patients when targeting a glucose range of 140 to 180 mg/dL and limiting the infusion duration.

Pharmacists reducing medication risk in medical outpatient clinics: a retrospective study of 18 clinics

BACKGROUND

The role of pharmacists in hospital inpatient settings is well recognised; however, pharmacists are relatively new to outpatient clinic settings in Australia. Evidence to justify the clinical effectiveness of pharmacists, in terms of identifying and resolving medication-related problems in an outpatient setting in Australia is limited.

AIMS

To investigate the clinical effectiveness of outpatient clinic pharmacists across multiple medical disciplines.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted by auditing medical records for patients who had an outpatient clinic pharmacist consult between June 2019 and February 2020 in a large quaternary hospital. All pharmacist recommendations targeting a medication-related problem were audited. Recommendations were considered 'resolved' if accepted and actioned by the patient and/or a clinician. The resolved recommendations were risk rated using a validated tool for medication-related patient harm.

RESULTS

There were 18 clinic pharmacist roles across multiple medical disciplines, of which 46 pharmacists conducted outpatient consults. A total of 7599 consults was conducted and a purposeful random sample of 572 (8%) consults was audited for 552 unique patients. There were 399 recommendations recorded in the notes by clinic pharmacists, a mean (standard deviation) of 0.95 (0.97) per patient. Of these, 328 (82%) were resolved; 269 (82%) were classified as low or moderate risk and 59 (18%) were classified as high-risk recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinic pharmacists in multidisciplinary outpatient clinics are effective at identifying and resolving medication-related problems. Our research demonstrated that 18% of these resolved recommendations prevented a high-risk medication-related harm event.

Understanding safety differently: developing a model of resilience in the use of intravenous insulin infusions in hospital in-patients-a feasibility study protocol

BACKGROUND

Intravenous insulin infusions are considered the treatment of choice for critically ill patients and non-critically ill patients with persistent raised blood glucose who are unable to eat, to achieve optimal blood glucose levels. The benefits of using intravenous insulin infusions as well as the problems experienced are well described in the scientific literature. Traditional approaches for improving patient safety have focused on identifying errors, understanding their causes and designing solutions to prevent them. Such approaches do not take into account the complex nature of healthcare systems, which cannot be controlled solely by following standards. An emerging approach called Resilient Healthcare proposes that, to improve safety, it is necessary to focus on how work can be performed successfully as well as how work has failed.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study will be conducted at Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and will involve three phases. Phase I: explore how work is imagined by analysing intravenous insulin infusion guidelines and conducting focus group discussions with guidelines developers, managers and healthcare practitioners. Phase II: explore the interplay between how work is imagined and how work is performed using mixed methods. Quantitative data will include blood glucose levels, insulin infusion rates, number of hypoglycaemic and hyperglycaemic events from patients' electronic records. Qualitative data will include video reflexive ethnography: video recording healthcare practitioners using intravenous insulin infusions and then conducting reflexive meetings with them to discuss selected video footage. Phase III: compare findings from phase I and phase II to develop a model for using intravenous insulin infusions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approvals have been granted by the South Central-Oxford C Research Ethics Committee, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and University of Reading. The results will be disseminated through presentations at appropriate conferences and meetings, and publications in peer-reviewed journals.

Assessment of Insulin-related Knowledge among Healthcare Professionals in a Large Teaching Hospital in the United Kingdom

Despite numerous strategies introduced to promote the safe use of insulin, insulin-related medication errors persist. Our aim was to examine the knowledge and self-reported confidence of a range of healthcare professionals regarding insulin use in a large teaching hospital in the North of England. A 16-item electronic questionnaire was prepared in light of locally reported insulin-related incidents and distributed electronically to all healthcare professionals at the hospital over a 4-week study period. A range of healthcare professionals, including nurses, pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, junior doctors and consultants, completed the questionnaires (n = 109). Pharmacists achieved the greatest percentage of mean correct answers overall (49%), followed by consultant doctors (38%) and pharmacy technicians (37%), junior doctors (34%) and nurses (32%). Healthcare professionals were mainly “slightly confident” in their knowledge and use of insulin. Confidence level positively correlated to performance, but number of years’ experience did not result in higher confidence or performance. This small-scale study allowed for a broad assessment of insulin-related topics that have been identified both nationally and locally as particularly problematic. Identifying knowledge gaps may help tailor strategies to help improve insulin knowledge and patient safety.

Reduction of medication errors related to sliding scale insulin by the introduction of a standardized order sheet

Insulin is frequently used for glycemic control. Medication errors related to insulin are a common problem for medical institutions. Here, we prepared a standardized sliding scale insulin (SSI) order sheet and assessed the effect of its introduction. Observations before and after the introduction of the standardized SSI template were conducted at Gifu University Hospital. The incidence of medication errors, hyperglycemia, and hypoglycemia related to SSI were obtained from the electronic medical records. The introduction of the standardized SSI order sheet significantly reduced the incidence of medication errors related to SSI compared with that prior to its introduction (12/165 [7.3%] vs 4/159 [2.1%], P = .048). However, the incidence of hyperglycemia (≥250 mg/dL) and hypoglycemia (≤50 mg/dL) in patients who received SSI was not significantly different between the 2 groups. The introduction of the standardized SSI order sheet reduced the incidence of medication errors related to SSI.

Impact of Pharmacist Intervention on Appropriate Insulin Pen Use in Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in a Rural Area in Iran

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of pharmacist-conducted educational intervention on reducing errors related to inappropriate insulin pen use.

METHODS

This was a prospective, before-after study with an educational intervention component. The study was conducted on 122 elderly diabetic patients. Data were collected through interviews using researcher-administered questionnaires as well as patients' medical records. Patients were asked about the preparation, injection, and storage techniques, they followed when using insulin pens. Blood glucose parameters were extracted from laboratory records. After the detection of errors, patients and their caregivers were instructed about the insulin pen use by the pharmacist. Patients were reevaluated after 12 weeks.

FINDINGS

Patients' mean age was 67.2 ± 3.5 with male: female ratio of 71:51. Mean diabetes duration was 7.1 ± 2.8 years. Fifty-four patients (44.2%) stated that they had received instructions for insulin pen use previously. The majority of this group (24 cases, 44.4%) reported that the instructions were given by a pharmacist. The mean number of errors decreased from 3.99 ± 0.22 errors per patient to 1.49 ± 0.13 errors (odds ratio: 0.28, 95% confidence interval: 0.23-0.33,P < 0.05). Of eleven evaluated insulin pen-related medication error items, nine items experienced a significant decrease after patient education. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels decreased significantly from 161.7 ± 12.5 to 147.3 ± 13.1 mg/dL (P < 0.05). However, glycated hemoglobin levels did not change significantly after 3 months (P = 0.18). Controlled FPG had a significant rise from 45% before education to 63.9% postintervention (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists can play an important role in safe and efficient use of insulin pen in elderly diabetic patients by minimizing the likelihood of medication errors associated with insulin pen use.

Determining Current Insulin Pen Use Practices and Errors in the Inpatient Setting

BACKGROUND

The use of insulin pens in the inpatient setting has continued to be a controversial decision. Insulin pens provide several advantages, but given significant reports of medication errors, several organizations have issued alerts to caution users about safety concerns. A survey was conducted to assess the prevalence of insulin pen use and current utilization trends in the inpatient setting.

METHODS

The 31-question guided-logic survey was developed based on review of primary literature regarding insulin pen utilization and evaluated by a panel of medication safety experts from a variety of health care settings. The survey was sent electronically to subscribers of medication safety organizations.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 474 respondents. Approximately three fourths of respondents indicated insulin pens were on formulary at their institution (n = 332; 74%). Of those who have had insulin pens on formulary, 15% (n = 49) are no longer using them. The most common reasons for not utilizing pens were cost and safety concerns. Pens were reported to be stored in the pharmacy prior to administration (n = 230; 78%) and in a patient's bin (n = 202; 69%) afterward. More than half of respondents use two patient identifiers on the pen and label with a bar code. Approximately 30% reported that an insulin pen has been used on more than one patient at least once in their institution, while 6% were not sure.

CONCLUSION

Insulin pens are widely being used in the inpatient setting. Various mitigation strategies are employed to reduce the risk of harm associated with insulin pen use. Health care professionals believe insulin pens are clinically useful and can be used safely in the inpatient setting. Many organizations and expert panels disseminate best practices in an effort to help ensure their safety. Further studies are needed to assess and validate the risk mitigation strategies identified through this research.

Facilitating the safe use of insulin pens in hospitals through a mentored quality-improvement program

PURPOSE

Results of the MENTORED QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IMPACT PROGRAM℠ (MQIIP) on Ensuring Insulin Pen Safety in Hospitals, which was part of an ASHP educational initiative aimed at ensuring the safe use of insulin pens in hospitals, are described.

METHODS

During this ASHP initiative, which also included continuing-education activities and Web-based resources, distance mentoring by pharmacists with expertise in the safe use of insulin pens was provided to interprofessional teams at 14 hospitals between September 2014 and May 2015. The results of baseline assessments of nursing staff knowledge of insulin pen use, insulin pen storage and labeling audits, and insulin pen injection observations conducted in September and October 2014 were the basis for insulin pen quality-improvement plans. Postintervention data were collected in April and May 2015.

RESULTS

Compared with the baseline period, significant improvements in nurses' knowledge of insulin pen use, insulin pen labeling and storage, and insulin pen administration were observed in the postintervention period despite the relatively short time frame for implementation of quality-improvement plans. Program participants are committed to sustaining and building on improvements achieved during the program. The outcome measures described in this report could be adapted by other health systems to identify opportunities to improve the safety of insulin pen use.

CONCLUSION

Focused attention on insulin pen safety through an interprofessional team approach during the MQIIP enabled participating sites to detect potential safety issues based on collected data, develop targeted process changes, document improvements, and identify areas requiring further intervention. A sustained organizational commitment is required to ensure the safe use of insulin pen devices in hospitals.

A stewardship intervention program for safe medication management and use of antidiabetic drugs

Background

Diabetes patients are complex due to considerations of polypharmacy, multimorbidities, medication adherence, dietary habits, health literacy, socioeconomic status, and cultural factors. Meanwhile, insulin and oral hypoglycemic agents are high-alert medications. Therefore it is necessary to require a multidisciplinary team’s integrated endeavors to enhance safe medication management and use of antidiabetic drugs.

Methods

A 5-year stewardship intervention program, including organizational measures and quality improvement activities in storage, prescription, dispensing, administration, and monitoring, was performed in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, People’s Republic of China, a 3,200-bed hospital with 3.5 million outpatient visits annually.

Results

The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University has obtained a 100% implementation rate of standard storage of antidiabetic drugs in the Pharmacy and wards since August 2012. A zero occurrence of dispensing errors related to highly “look-alike” and “sound-alike” NovoMix 30^® (biphasic insulin aspart) and NovoRapid^® (insulin aspart) has been achieved since October 2011. Insulin injection accuracy among ward nurses significantly increased from 82% (first quarter 2011) to 96% (fourth quarter 2011) (P<0.05). The number of medication administration errors related to insulin continuously decreased from 20 (2011) to six (2014). The occurrence rate of hypoglycemia in non–endocrinology ward diabetes inpatients during 2011–2013 was significantly less than that in 2010 (5.03%–5.53% versus 8.27%) (P<0.01). Percentage of correct management of hypoglycemia by nurses increased from 41.5% (April 2014) to 67.2% (August 2014) (P<0.01). The percentage of outpatient diabetes patients receiving standard insulin injection education increased from 80% (April 2012) to 95.2% (October 2012) (P<0.05). Insulin injection techniques among diabetes outpatients who started to receive insulin were better than indicated in data from two questionnaire surveys in the literature, including the percentage checking injection sites prior to injection (85.6%), priming before injection (98.1%), rotation of injecting sites (98.1%), remixing before use (94.5%), keeping the pen needle under the skin for >10 seconds (99.4%), and using the pen needle only once (88.7%). On-site inspection indicated of great improvement in the percentage of drug-related problems in the antidiabetes regimen between the first and second quarter of 2014 (1.08% versus 0.28%) (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Quality improvements in safe medication management and use of antidiabetic drugs can be achieved by multidisciplinary collaboration among pharmacists, nurses, physicians, and information engineers.

Enhancing insulin-use safety in hospitals: Practical recommendations from an ASHP Foundation expert consensus panel

PURPOSE

Consensus recommendations to help ensure safe insulin use in hospitalized patients are presented.

SUMMARY

Insulin products are frequently involved in medication errors in hospitals, and insulin is classified as a high-alert medication when used in inpatient settings. In an initiative to promote safer insulin use, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) Research and Education Foundation convened a 21-member panel representing the fields of pharmacy, medicine, and nursing and consumer advocacy groups for a three-stage consensus-building initiative. The panel's consensus recommendations include the following: development of protocol-driven insulin order sets, elimination of the routine use of correction/sliding-scale insulin doses for management of hyperglycemia, restrictions on the types of insulin products stored in patient care areas, and policies to restrict the preparation of insulin bolus doses and i.v. infusions to the pharmacy department. In addition, the panelists recommended that hospitals better coordinate insulin use with meal intake and glucose testing, prospectively monitor the coordination of insulin delivery and rates of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, and provide standardized education and competency assessment for all hospital-based health care professionals responsible for insulin use.

CONCLUSION

A 21-member expert panel convened by the ASHP Foundation identified 10 recommendations for enhancing insulin-use safety across the medication-use process in hospitals. Professional organizations, accrediting bodies, and consumer groups can play a critical role in the translation of these recommendations into practice. Rigorous research studies and program evaluations are needed to study the impact of implementation of these recommendations.