Sliding Scale Insulin Regimens Research Articles

Predicting the Need for Basal-Bolus Insulin in Hospitalized Patients With Hyperglycemia: Is Sliding Scale Sometimes the Answer?

Uncontrolled blood glucose (BG) is associated with increased risk of infection, complications, and mortality in hospitalized patients. American Diabetes Association guidelines currently recommend basal insulin for all hospitalized, non-critically ill patients requiring insulin and state that “use of only a sliding scale insulin regimen in the inpatient hospital setting is strongly discouraged”. In practice, however, sliding scale only is used not infrequently. Here, we challenge the recommendation for universal basal insulin use and leverage machine learning to predict which inpatients would indeed benefit from basal insulin at time of admission.Querying inpatient electronic health record data for hospitalizations between 2008–2020, we identified a cohort of 16,868 unique patients who achieved a day of “good control”, defined as ≥ 3 BGs that were within 100–180 mg/dL without any values outside that range. Inclusion criteria were adult inpatients receiving subcutaneous insulin with BG of 100-180mg/dL on one calendar day. If patients had more than one “good day”, the first day of their most recent hospitalization was chosen. We excluded patients ordered for insulin pumps, insulin infusion, any insulin type that is rarely used (ordered < 25 times), TPN or PPN, or tube feeds. We also excluded patients with missing weights.We aimed to predict which patients would require > 6 units of insulin. We chose this threshold clinically, as patients with a total daily dose (TDD) of insulin < 6 units could reasonably be managed on sliding scale insulin alone. Using the threshold of 6 units, we used an ensemble machine learning method, called SuperLearner, to model a binary classification for high vs. low insulin users. Features included in the algorithm were collected prior to prediction time, including weight, height, age, sex, race, insurance status, A1c categories (normal, high, panic high, and missing), creatinine, diet, steroid use in prior 48 hours, admission BG, summary statistics of BG, numerous counts of relevant lab values in quantiles, history of basal insulin use, and counts of major diagnosis code groups. Prior insulin doses were not considered to better simulate admission insulin dosing.Compared to using only weight in the model, with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) of 0.59, our machine learning algorithm showed excellent predictive ability, with an AUROC of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.84 - 0.87) and area under the precision recall curve (AUPRC) of .65 (95% CI: 0.64 - 0.68) vs 0.29 with the weight-only model. Although it will need to be validated prospectively, our algorithm could be used to emphasize basal-bolus insulin on admission in patients predicted to require more insulin, whereas those predicted to require less could be started on sliding scale insulin or considered for oral anti-hyperglycemics.

Get Moving on Constipation

Get Moving on Constipation

Evidence generation for postprandial Insulin administration for better management of diabetes in noncritically iII patients

Introduction: Previously, premeal sliding scale insulin regimen was used to control sugar levels in hospitalized type-2 diabetes patients. However, the now recommended basal-bolus regimen also failed to show any substantial advantage over the traditional sliding scale regimen in the latest Cochrane review. Methodology: In this retrospective cohort study, data were collected from two groups of patients who received basal with premeal bolus regimen and those who received modified sliding scale regimen (basal with both pre- and lower dose postprandial insulin by sliding scale). The data collected were analyzed to compare the mean reduction in blood glucose level, number of hypoglycemic episodes, and mean hospital stay among the two groups. Results: A total of forty patients were included in the study. Twenty received basal with both pre- and postprandial insulin correction by sliding scale and other twenty received basal insulin with postmeal bolus correction regimen. The mean hospital stay in sliding scale with postprandial insulin correction was 3.9 ± 2.2 days, and in other group, it was 6.1 ± 4.47 days. Two out of twenty patients in the sliding scale with postprandial insulin group, whereas six out of twenty patients in the other group had hypoglycemic events. Conclusion: Basal with both pre- and postmeal (low dose) insulin by sliding scale might be an answer to the concerns of faster attainment of euglycemia in hospitalized type-2 diabetes patients with minimal risk of hypoglycemia. We plan a prospective study with a larger sample size to substantiate the evidence.

1203-P: Safety Implications of Insulin Prescribing in the Emergency Department

Background: Despite being a common comorbidity, diabetes is often overlooked when patients present to the emergency department (ED) with nondiabetic emergencies. Aims: To examine the associations between insulin treated patients presenting to the ED with nondiabetic emergencies and; (i) adverse glycaemia (AG); including hypoglycaemia (&amp;lt; 70 mg/dL) and hyperglycaemia (&amp;lt; 180 mg/dL) and insulin prescribing errors, (ii) glycaemic variability and AG following ED evaluation and ward diabetes management. Methods: A two-year retrospective medical record audit of discharged insulin treated adult patients (≥ 18 years) was conducted at a quaternary hospital. All patients presented to the ED with nondiabetic emergencies and admitted to general wards for &amp;gt; 24 hours and &amp;lt; 30 days. Results: Of the 103 patients (Table), 25 (24%) had one or more prescribing errors charted in the ED. Thirty-nine (37.8%) patients experienced hypoglycaemia. Of these, 21 (53.8%) were prescribed sliding scale insulin (SSI) in the ED (p = 0.05). Despite uncontrolled hyperglycaemia, 40 (47.6%) patients had no change to their diabetes treatment during admission (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Half of insulin treated patients experienced uncontrolled hyperglycaemia. Use of SSI regimens prescribed in the ED were associated with higher risk of AG. Safety for insulin treated patients should be prioritised from the time the hospital journey begins in ED to after discharge. Disclosure S.L. Patterson: None. E.I. Ekinci: None. A. Driscoll: None. B. Rasmussen: None.

How does a sliding scale insulin regimen compare with a basal bolus regimen for non-critically ill hospitalized adults with diabetes mellitus?

How does a sliding scale insulin regimen compare with a basal bolus regimen for non-critically ill hospitalized adults with diabetes mellitus?

Interventions to improve insulin prescribing practice for people with diabetes in hospital: a systematic review.

To conduct a systematic review of literature to identify interventions that are effective in improving insulin prescribing for people with diabetes in the hospital setting. Computerized bibliographic databases were searched for studies published in English that described the effectiveness of interventions to improve insulin prescribing within the hospital setting. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported data that compared insulin prescribing practice after an intervention or compared with a control group. Studies were not excluded on the basis of publication date, geographical location or risk of bias assessment. We identified 35 studies for inclusion in the review, including two cluster randomized controlled trials, two cohort studies, and 31 uncontrolled before-after studies. Studies reported a variety of interventions that aimed to increase insulin prescribing accuracy or completeness or decrease the use of discouraged subcutaneous sliding scale insulin regimens. Differences in definition of insulin prescribing error, terminology and common practice based on geographical location was evident, and quality issues with respect to study design and reporting somewhat limited the interpretation of conclusions. Implementing strategies that are sensitive to local context and designed to increase adherence to insulin prescribing guidelines are associated with a reduction in prescribing errors. Future implementation should build on effective approaches including multifaceted interventions involving multiple stakeholders at various institutional levels. Future studies in insulin prescribing errors would benefit from the use of standardized approaches, terminology and outcome measures to enable greater comparison.

A Comparison of Inpatient Cost Per Day in General Surgery Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Basal-Bolus versus Sliding Scale Insulin Regimens.

BackgroundThe identification of cost-effective glycaemic management strategies is critical to hospitals. Treatment with a basal-bolus insulin (BBI) regimen has been shown to result in better glycaemic control and fewer complications than sliding scale regular insulin (SSI) in general surgery patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but the effect on costs is unknown.ObjectiveWe conducted a post hoc analysis of the RABBIT Surgery trial to examine whether total inpatient costs per day for general surgery patients with T2DM treated with BBI (n = 103) differed from those for patients with T2DM treated with SSI (n = 99) regimens.MethodsData were collected from patient clinical and hospital billing records. Charges were adjusted to reflect hospital costs. General linearized models were used to estimate the risk-adjusted effects of BBI versus SSI treatment on average total inpatient costs per day.ResultsRisk-adjusted average total inpatient costs per day were $US5404. Treatment with BBI compared with SSI reduced average total inpatient costs per day by $US751 (14%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 20–4). Being treated in a university medical centre, being African American or having a bowel procedure or higher-volume pharmacy use significantly reduced costs per day.ConclusionsIn general surgery patients with T2DM, a BBI regimen significantly reduced average total hospital costs per day compared with an SSI regimen. BBI has been shown to improve outcomes in a randomized controlled trial. Those results, combined with our findings regarding savings, suggest that hospitals should consider adopting BBI regimens in patients with T2DM undergoing surgery.

I’ll See You Again in 30 Days

I’ll See You Again in 30 Days

The impact of basal bolus and sliding scale insulin management on dosing administration errors in the hospital setting

Background Insulin is consistently among the top five medications associated with administration errors in the hospital setting. The sliding scale insulin (SSI) therapy used for control of inpatient hyperglycaemia is largely ineffective in controlling inpatient blood glucose levels, and guidelines now advocate the use of basal bolus insulin (BBI) therapy. However, SSI is still extensively used in hospitals worldwide. There is little published literature evaluating issues surrounding the administration accuracy using a BBI approach compared with that for SSI. Aim To assess dosing administration accuracy of SSI versus BBI regimens in patients undergoing glycaemic management in a tertiary teaching hospital, and the subsequent impact on the following blood glucose level. Methods Data were collected prospectively for the BBI arm and retrospectively for the SSI arm for the first 5 days of treatment in hospitalised patients requiring glycaemic management. Records were assessed for the incidence of omitted doses, or administered doses that were higher or lower than those prescribed. Results For the SSI regimen (n = 25 patients, 251 doses), 16.3% of doses were missed compared to 2.5% of doses for BBI (n = 21 patients, 467 doses, p < 0.001). Low doses in the SSI and BBI arms occurred at incidence rates of 8.7% and 8.8% respectively (p = 0.96), while high dose incidence rates were 2.3% and 0% respectively (p = 0.004). When patients received less than the prescribed amount (either a low or missed insulin dose), the subsequent blood glucose was 1.8 mmol/L higher for BBI (p = 0.032) relative to correctly administered doses and 2.0 mmol/L higher for SSI (p = 0.038). Only one omitted dose incident for SSI and two incidents for BBI were formally reported as dosing errors. Conclusion BBI management resulted in more accurate dosing administration, especially with regard to reducing the incidence of omitted doses. The administration of lower-than-prescribed doses adversely impacted subsequent blood glucose control.

Transition to Basal-Bolus from Sliding Scale Insulin Regimens: Intervention Process and Outcomes at a Multi-state, Multifacility Chain of Skilled Nursing Facilities

Transition to Basal-Bolus from Sliding Scale Insulin Regimens: Intervention Process and Outcomes at a Multi-state, Multifacility Chain of Skilled Nursing Facilities

Sliding-scale versus basal-bolus insulin in the management of severe or acute hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes patients: a retrospective study.

Sliding-scale and basal-bolus insulin regimens are two options available for the treatment of severe or acute hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. Although its use is not recommended, sliding-scale insulin therapy is still being used widely. The aims of the study were to compare the glycemic control achieved by using sliding-scale or basal-bolus regimens for the management of severe or acute hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes and to analyze factors associated with the types of insulin therapy used in the management of severe or acute hyperglycemia. This retrospective study was conducted using the medical records of patients with acute or severe hyperglycemia admitted to a hospital in Malaysia from January 2008 to December 2012. A total of 202 patients and 247 admissions were included. Patients treated with the basal-bolus insulin regimen attained lower fasting blood glucose (10.8±2.3 versus 11.6±3.5 mmol/L; p = 0.028) and mean glucose levels throughout severe/acute hyperglycemia (12.3±1.9 versus 12.8±2.2; p = 0.021) compared with sliding-scale insulin regimens. Diabetic ketoacidosis (p = 0.043), cardiovascular diseases (p = 0.005), acute exacerbation of bronchial asthma (p = 0.010), and the use of corticosteroids (p = 0.037) and loop diuretics (p = 0.016) were significantly associated with the type of insulin regimen used. In conclusion, type 2 diabetes patients with severe and acute hyperglycemia achieved better glycemic control with the basal-bolus regimen than with sliding-scale insulin, and factors associated with the insulin regimen used could be identified.

Burden of Sliding Scale Insulin Use in Elderly Long‐Term Care Residents with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

To examine prevalence, practice patterns, and associated burden of sliding scale insulin (SSI) therapy in elderly adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). A retrospective cross-sectional study assessing merged medical chart data and the Minimum Data Set. One hundred seventeen long-term care (LTC) facilities in seven U.S. states. Elderly adults with insulin-treated T2DM (N=2,096) admitted to a LTC facility after January 1, 2009, who had been in the facility for at least 3 months before chart abstraction and had received treatment with non-SSI or SSI regimens. The latter were categorized into SSI-only, basal–SSI, prandial–SSI, basal–prandial–SSI, and multiple regimens with SSI. Data were collected from September 2010 through September 2011. Demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded. Fingerstick burden was assessed as the average number of fingersticks per week and average number without subsequent insulin administration. Other measures included glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and hypoglycemia events. Overall, 73.8% of participants received SSI therapy. SSI-treated participants were more likely to be younger (P=.01), non-white (P=.002), and receiving sulfonylurea (P=.004) than non-SSI treated participants. SSI therapy was associated with a mean±standard deviation of 19.9±7.9 fingersticks per week, of which 12.5±7.6 were not followed by insulin administration. Fewer SSI-treated participants than non-SSI treated participants had one or more HbA1c measurements of 7.0% or less (48.8% vs 57.2%) or 8.5% or less (85.2% vs 87.6%, respectively). Rates of hypoglycemia were similar in both groups (15.0% vs 14.9%). SSI therapy is widely used in LTC facilities and is associated with a high fingerstick burden. SSI regimens are associated with poorer glycemic control but a rate of hypoglycemia similar to that of non-SSI regimens.

Glycemic control and diabetes management in hospitalized patients in Brazil

BackgroundThe importance of tight blood glucose control among outpatients with diabetes mellitus is well established, however, the management of diabetes in the hospital setting is generally considered secondary in importance. This study sought to assess glycemic control and diabetes management in adult patients admitted to hospitals in Brazil.MethodsA cross-sectional and nationwide survey was conducted from July 2010 to January 2012. Eligible cases were 18 years of age or older, had a diagnosis of diabetes and a hospitalization length of stay ≥72 hours. Socio-demographic information, hospitalization details, and data on diabetes diagnosis, management and treatment were collected for all patients by chart review. Information on all blood glucose (BG) readings for a maximum of 20 consecutive days of hospitalization was recorded for each patient.ResultsOverall, 2,399 patients were surveyed in 24 hospitals located in 13 cities from all five Brazilian regions. The prevalence of patients presenting hyperglycemic (BG >180 mg/dL) or hypoglycemic (BG <70 mg/dL) events was 89.4% and 30.9% in patients in general wards, and 88.2% and 27.7% in those in Intensive Care Units (ICUs), respectively. In addition, a BG measure >180 mg/dL was recorded in two-thirds of the patient-days. A high proportion of patients were treated with sliding-scale insulin regimen alone in the general wards (52.0%) and in the ICUs (69.2%), and only 35.7% and 3.9% received appropriate insulin therapy in general wards (basal + bolus insulin) and in ICUs (continuous IV insulin), respectively.ConclusionsInpatient glycemic control and diabetes management needs improvement. Opportunities to improve care in Brazilian hospitals include expanded use of intravenous insulin and subcutaneous basal-bolus insulin protocols, avoiding use of sliding-scale insulin alone, increased frequency of blood glucose monitoring, and institution wide quality improvement efforts targeting both physician and nursing behavior.

Adjunctive Sitagliptin Therapy in Postoperative Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Pilot Study

Aim. We aimed to determine if sitagliptin added to standard postoperative standardized sliding-scale insulin regimens improved blood glucose. Methods. A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study was conducted in diabetic cardiac surgery patients. Patients received sitagliptin or placebo after surgery for 4 days. The primary endpoint was to estimate the effect of adjunctive sitagliptin versus placebo on overall mean blood glucose in the 4-day period after surgery. Results. Sixty-two patients participated. Repeated measures tests indicated no significant difference between the groups in the overall mean blood glucose level with a mean of 147.2 ± 4.8 mg/dL and 153.0 ± 4.6 mg/dL for the test and the control group, respectively (P = 0.388). Conclusions. Sitagliptin added to normal postoperative glucose management practices did not improve overall mean blood glucose control in diabetic patients in the postoperative setting.

Optimizing Inpatient Glycemic Control with Basal-Bolus Insulin Therapy

Hyperglycemia is highly prevalent in the acute-care setting and is associated with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Evidence suggests that glycemic control in this population is suboptimal, due in part to continued use of nonphysiologic sliding-scale insulin strategies without scheduled basal insulin doses or prandial insulin with concomitant correction doses. Although the ineffectiveness and risks of sliding-scale insulin regimens have been criticized for decades, sliding-scale insulin is still the most commonly prescribed subcutaneous insulin regimen among inpatients. Improving inpatient management requires the use of scheduled basal-bolus insulin therapy that includes basal insulin, nutritional insulin, and supplemental, or correctional, insulin. Insulin analogs are the preferred insulins, as they provide a more physiologic action than human insulin regimens, are associated with a lower risk of hypoglycemia, and are more convenient to administer than human insulins. Standardized insulin protocols and subcutaneous insulin order sets are critical components of effective inpatient glycemic control. Although preliminary data have demonstrated that inpatient diabetes management programs involving basal-bolus insulin therapy are effective and well tolerated, more research is needed.

Diabetes: Intensive Insulin Protocol Implementation and Outcomes in the Medical and Surgical Wards at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center

Hyperglycemia is an important marker for clinical outcomes and mortality in hospitalized patients. New national standards have been established emphasizing the importance of improving inpatient glycemic control in individuals with diabetes or new-onset hyperglycemia. Implementation of these new standards is complex and requires a multidisciplinary team approach. A basal-bolus insulin regimen approach has been shown to improve inpatient glycemic control. Few studies have been published regarding basal-bolus insulin protocol outcomes in the non-intensive care unit (ICU) setting. To evaluate the efficacy of a basal-bolus insulin protocol on inpatient glycemic control in a non-ICU setting, as measured by mean blood glucose and number of hypoglycemic episodes per patient admission. A retrospective, observational, single-center study was conducted to compare blood glucose control pre- (October 2006-March 2007) and postprotocol (November 2007-January 2008) implementation. Inclusion criteria consisted of patient admission to a medical or surgical ward for at least 72 hours, with a diagnosis of diabetes, or presentation with 2 blood glucose readings greater than 180 mg/dL. Patients admitted to the ICU or those not admitted to a medical or surgical ward were excluded. Following protocol implementation, the mean +/- SD blood glucose level increased from 174 +/- 88 mg/dL to 188 +/- 95 mg/dL (p < 0.001) and the hypoglycemic incidents significantly decreased, from 1.11 to 0.51 events per patient admission (p < 0.0025). In this pilot study, implementation of a basal-bolus insulin protocol significantly reduced hypoglycemic events; however, mean blood glucose values increased. These results suggest that a basal-bolus insulin protocol can reduce hypoglycemia; however, factors such as protocol compliance, barriers in overcoming the use of the traditional sliding scale insulin regimens, staff education, and change of work-flow habits can influence the overall efficacy and impact of a basal-bolus insulin protocol on inpatient glycemic control.

The Nuts and Bolts of Subcutaneous Insulin Therapy in Non-Critical Care Hospital Settings

In non-critical care settings, patients with hyperglycemia experience increased morbidity and mortality. Despite an increased recognition of the importance of treating inpatient hyperglycemia, many patients are still not adequately controlled. Insulin offers flexibility to address varying glucose levels and therefore is the preferred therapy to achieve recommended targets and manage hyperglycemia. Traditional sliding-scale insulin regimens often ineffectively control blood glucose levels as they are unable to mimic physiologic insulin secretion. Basal-bolus insulin regimens are recognized as a more effective way to correct hyperglycemia in non-critical care settings and a systematic glycemic control program is necessary to address hyperglycemia while minimizing hypoglycemia. Critical components of these programs include addressing barriers to glycemic control, understanding varying needs of different types of patients, and developing standardized subcutaneous insulin orders to achieve target glucose levels. This article provides strategies for using insulin in non-critical care settings to facilitate glycemic control.

Diabetes Management Demands Flexibility

Diabetes Management Demands Flexibility

The Prevalence and Persistence of Sliding Scale Insulin Use Among Newly Admitted Elderly Nursing Home Residents With Diabetes Mellitus

To evaluate the initiation and persistence of sliding scale insulin (SSI) therapy in elderly nursing home (NH) residents. A longitudinal study of NH residents (N = 9804) with diabetes aged 65 years and older who were admitted between 2002 and 2003 and resided for 1 month or longer in long-term care facilities associated with a for-profit nursing home chain. Rates of SSI use were high among patients who were started on insulin during their stay in nursing homes (54%), and 22% of the total number of orders for insulin were for SSI. After insulin initiation, 83% of residents who were started on SSI remained on it by the end of the study. Of those who had not started on SSI, 33% were later switched to SSI. This study demonstrated that SSI regimens were highly prevalent and, once initiated, tended to be continued in the treatment of elderly patients with diabetes newly admitted to nursing homes. Multiple factors were found to be significantly associated with initiation and persistence of SSI. The high prevalence and persistent use of SSI is inconsistent with the American Medical Directors Association guideline as well as current recommendations. Additional studies are needed to evaluate outcomes associated with prolonged SSI use in long-term care facilities.

An Institutional Process to Improve Inpatient Glycemic Control

Many institutions are evaluating their inpatient patterns of care for patients with diabetes mellitus and hyperglycemia, based upon compelling evidence that strict glycemic control improves outcomes in a variety of hospital settings. In 2005, a multidisciplinary task force was established at the University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center in Lexington, Kentucky, to guide a process to improve the quality and safety of inpatients with hyperglycemia. This article describes the stepwise process including an examination of our procedures, adoption of standards, and establishment of common protocols and procedures. Successful implementation of the protocols was preceded by extensive educational efforts. Refinement of the protocols based on early experience and feedback from staff has resulted in improvements in glycemic parameters and less reliance on sliding scale insulin regimens.