Management of diabetes-related hypoglycemia

Practical Approaches to Diagnosing, Treating and Preventing Hypoglycemia in Diabetes

Hypoglycemia in individuals with diabetes can increase the risk of morbidity and all-cause mortality in this patient group, particularly in the context of cardiovascular impairment, and can significantly decrease the quality of life. Hypoglycemia can present one of the most difficult aspects of diabetes management from both a patient and healthcare provider perspective. Strategies used to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia include individualizing glucose targets, selecting the appropriate medication, modifying diet and lifestyle and applying diabetes technology. Using a patient-centered care approach, the provider should work in partnership with the patient and family to prevent hypoglycemia through evidence-based management of the disease and appropriate education.

Influence of health locus of control and fear of hypoglycaemia on glycaemic control and treatment satisfaction in people with Type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy

AIM

To assess the influence of health locus of control and fear of hypoglycaemia on metabolic control and treatment satisfaction in people with Type 1 diabetes mellitus on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

METHODS

People with Type 1 diabetes on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion for at least 1 year, sub-classified as an 'acceptable glucose control' group [HbA_1c ≤ 58 mmol/mol (7.5%)] and a 'suboptimum glucose control' group [HbA_1c > 58 mmol/mol (7.5%)], were consecutively enrolled in a multicentre cross-sectional study. Questionnaires were administered to assess health locus of control [Multidimensional Health Locus of Control (MHLC) scale, with internal and external subscales], fear of hypoglycaemia [Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey II (HFS-II)] and treatment satisfaction [Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ)].

RESULTS

We enrolled 214 participants (mean ± sd age 43.4 ± 12.1 years). The suboptimum glucose control group (n = 127) had lower mean ± sd internal MHLC and DTSQ scores than the acceptable glucose control group (19.6 ± 5.2 vs 21.0 ± 5.0, P = 0.04 and 28.8 ± 4.8 vs 30.9 ± 4.5, P < 0.001). HFS-II scores did not differ between the two groups. Internal MHLC score was negatively associated with HbA_1c (r = -0.15, P < 0.05) and positively associated with the number of mild and severe hypoglycaemic episodes (r = 0.16, P < 0.05 and r = 0.18, P < 0.001, respectively) and with DTSQ score (r = 0.17, P < 0.05). HFS-II score was negatively associated with DTSQ score (r = -0.18, P < 0.05) and positively with number of severe hypoglycaemic episodes (r = 0.16, P < 0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with Type 1 diabetes receiving continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, high internal locus represents the most important locus of control pattern for achieving good metabolic control.

New treatments for type 2 diabetes in the UK - an evolving landscape

New classes of treatments for type 2 diabetes have been developed recently and are now available in the UK. This review aims to summarise key clinical efficacy, tolerability and safety data for these agents, including liraglutide, which has received preliminary review by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) and was launched in the UK in 2009.

Drug-induced hypoglycaemia: an update

Drugs are the most frequent cause of hypoglycaemia in adults. Although hypoglycaemia is a well known adverse effect of antidiabetic agents, it may occasionally develop in the course of treatment with drugs used in everyday clinical practice, including NSAIDs, analgesics, antibacterials, antimalarials, antiarrhythmics, antidepressants and other miscellaneous agents. They induce hypoglycaemia by stimulating insulin release, reducing insulin clearance or interfering with glucose metabolism. Several drugs may also potentiate the hypoglycaemic effect of antidiabetic agents. Administration of these agents to individuals with diabetes mellitus is of most concern. Many of these drugs, and depending on clinical setting, may also induce hyperglycaemia. Drug-induced hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity may lead in certain circumstances to hypoglycaemia. Some drugs may also induce hypoglycaemia by causing pancreatitis. Drug-induced hypoglycaemia is usually mild but may be severe. Effective clinical management can be handled through awareness of this drug-induced adverse effect on blood glucose levels. Herein, we review pertinent clinical information on the incidence of drug-induced hypoglycaemia and discuss the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, and prevention and management.

Diabetes management: optimizing roles for nurses in insulin initiation

Type 2 diabetes is a major public health concern. Screening and early diagnosis followed by prompt and aggressive treatment interventions can help control progression of diabetes and its complications. Nurses are often the first healthcare team members to interact with patients and are being called on to apply their specialized knowledge, training, and skills to educate and motivate patients with diabetes about insulin use and practical ways to achieve treatment goals. Clinical nurse specialists possess specific training and skills to provide this level of care, while staff or office-based nurses may be trained by physicians to fulfill a task-specific role. This manuscript reviews the benefits of intensive glycemic control in type 2 diabetes, therapeutic goals and guidelines, advances in insulin therapy, and contribution of nurses in overcoming barriers to insulin initiation and related aspects of diabetes care. Nurses are particularly well positioned to fill the gap and improve efficiency in diabetes-related healthcare by assisting patients with insulin initiation and other aspects of glycemic self-management.

Fear of hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes managed by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion: is it associated with poor glycemic control?

BACKGROUND

We surveyed the extent of fear of hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes treated by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and tested the hypothesis that suboptimal glycemic control during CSII is related to fear of hypoglycemia.

METHODS

We audited nonpregnant type 1 diabetes patients attending an Insulin Pump Clinic with at least 6 months' duration of CSII. In 104 eligible subjects, fear of hypoglycemia was assessed by questionnaire; 75 responded.

RESULTS

The median duration of CSII was 5 years (range, 1-29 years). Poor glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≥ 8.5%; mean ± SD, 9.1 ± 1.0%) was present in 27%, and this group had more men than a good-control group with HbA1c < 7.0% (43% vs. 11%). Substantial fear of hypoglycemia (score > 50%) occurred in 27% of subjects, but fear of hypoglycemia was not correlated with HbA1c. The only significant correlates of fear of hypoglycemia were accumulated episodes of severe hypoglycemia (r = 0.48, P < 0.001) and rate of hypoglycemia on CSII (r = 0.48, P < 0.001). The HbA1c on CSII was correlated with multiple daily injection (MDI) HbA1c (r = 0.66, P < 0.001) and the change in HbA1c (r = 0.63, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Fear of hypoglycemia is not correlated with, and is unlikely to be a major determinant of, HbA1c on CSII. Other factors (such as HbA1c on MDI and adherence to insulin pump procedures) are likely to be more important. Nevertheless, substantial fear of hypoglycemia is present in many CSII-treated people and may adversely affect quality of life and psychological well-being.

Addressing hyperglycemia from hospital admission to discharge

BACKGROUND

This review examines glycemia management practices in hospitalized patients. Optimal glycemic control remains a challenge among hospitalized patients. Recent studies have questioned the benefit of tight glycemic control and have raised concerns regarding the safety of this approach. As a result, medical societies have updated glycemic targets and have published new consensus guidelines for management of glycemia in hospitalized patients. This review highlights recent inpatient glycemic trials, the new glycemic targets and recommended strategies for management of glycemia in hospitalized patients.

METHODS

Medline and PubMed searches (diabetes, hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, intensive therapy insulin, tight glycemic control, and hospital patients) were performed for English-language articles on treatment of diabetes, insulin therapy, hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients published from 2004 to present. Earlier works cited in these papers were surveyed. Clinical studies, reviews, consensus/guidelines statements, and meta-analyses relevant to the identification and management of diabetes and hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients were included and selected. This is not an exhaustive review of the published literature.

RESULTS

Insulin remains the most appropriate agent for a majority of hospitalized patients. In critically ill patients insulin is given as a continuous intravenous (IV) infusion and in non-critically ill inpatients hyperglycemia is best managed using scheduled subcutaneous (SC) basal-bolus insulin regimens supplemented with correction doses as needed and adjusted daily with the guidance of frequent blood glucose monitoring. Prevention of hypoglycemia is equally as important to patient outcomes and is an equally necessary part of any effective glucose control program. Modern insulin analogs offer advantages over the older human insulins (e.g., regular and neutral protamine Hagedorn [NPH] insulin) because their time-action profiles more closely correspond to physiological basal and prandial insulin requirements, and have a lower propensity for inducing hypoglycemia than human insulin formulations. Long-acting basal insulin analogs (glargine, detemir) are suitable and preferred for the basal component of therapy; rapid-acting insulin analogs (aspart, lispro, glulisine) are recommended for bolus and correction doses. Sliding-scale insulin (SSI) regimens are not effective and should not be used, especially as this excludes a basal insulin component from the therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal glycemic management in the hospital setting requires judicious treatment of hyperglycemia while avoiding hypoglycemia. Insulin is the most appropriate agent for management of hyperglycemia for the majority of hospitalized patients. Intravenous insulin infusion is still preferred during and immediately after surgery, but s.c. basal insulin analogs with prandial or correction doses should be used after the immediate post-operative period, and also should be used in non-critically ill patients. Frequent and effective glucose monitoring is critical for avoiding wide deviations from acceptable glucose levels, which under a recently promulgated consensus guideline currently range between 140 mg/dL and 180 mg/dL. Glucose targets near 140 mg/dL are recommended as being the most appropriate for all hospitalized patients.

Diabetes-Related Medication-Induced Hypoglycemia

Hypoglycemia is a common adverse event in patients with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes and may be a barrier to patients achieving tight glycemic control. It is diagnosed either biochemically, as a blood glucose value, or clinically based on symptoms caused by an autonomic response to changes in blood glucose. Patients that experience repeated episodes of hypoglycemia lose the counterregulatory response that produces symptoms and results in hypoglycemia unawareness. Medications account for the most frequent cause of hypoglycemia in both the inpatient and outpatient setting. Treatment of hypoglycemia may be accomplished via the oral or parenteral route with 15 to 20 g of carbohydrate. Following treatment of the episode, it is important to evaluate for the cause and, if medication related, adjust the patient’s treatment regimen.

Fear of hypoglycaemia: defining a minimum clinically important difference in patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

To explore the concept of the Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MID) of the Worry Scale of the Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey (HFS-II) and to quantify the clinical importance of different types of patient-reported hypoglycaemia.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted in Germany with 392 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with combinations of oral anti-hyperglycaemic agents. Patients completed the HFS-II, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), and reported on severity of hypoglycaemia. Distribution- and anchor-based methods were used to determine MID. In turn, MID was used to determine if hypoglycaemia with or without need for assistance was clinically meaningful compared to having had no hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

112 patients (28.6%) reported hypoglycaemic episodes, with 15 patients (3.8%) reporting episodes that required assistance from others. Distribution- and anchor-based methods resulted in MID between 2.0 and 5.8 and 3.6 and 3.9 for the HFS-II, respectively. Patients who reported hypoglycaemia with (21.6) and without (12.1) need for assistance scored higher on the HFS-II (range 0 to 72) than patients who did not report hypoglycaemia (6.0).

CONCLUSION

We provide MID for HFS-II. Our findings indicate that the differences between having reported no hypoglycaemia, hypoglycaemia without need for assistance, and hypoglycaemia with need for assistance appear to be clinically important in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with oral anti-hyperglycaemic agents.

Use of therapeutic responses to glucose replacement to predict glucose patterns in diabetic patients presenting with severe hypoglycaemia

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether initial serum glucose levels, therapeutic responses to intravenous glucose replacement and changes in serum glucose levels over time could predict serum glucose patterns.

METHODS

The patients enrolled in this retrospective chart review had been previously diagnosed with diabetes mellitus and were later hospitalised for severe hypoglycaemia (SH). They were all admitted to the emergency department (ED) during a 4-year period between January 2003 and December 2006. Comparison of the therapeutic responses to glucose replacement according to the serum glucose patterns [categorised into recurrent hypoglycaemia (RH), overshoot hyperglycaemia (OH) and favourable groups] during the first 48 h was performed.

RESULTS

Compared with the favourable group, therapeutic responses to glucose replacement were significantly lower in the RH group and higher in the OH group; the changes in serum glucose levels over time were also significantly lower in the RH group and higher in the OH group.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic responses to glucose replacement and changes in serum glucose levels over time can differentiate diabetic patients with RH and OH from those with favourable glucose patterns during the first 48 h after presentation in the ED with SH. We believe that a 'response-to-treatment' based strategy is useful in determining the ED disposition of diabetic patients presenting with SH.

Impact of therapeutic advances on hypoglycaemia in type 2 diabetes

Patients with type 2 diabetes experience hypoglycaemia less frequently than those with type 1 diabetes. Some protection against hypoglycaemia is afforded by the relatively intact glucose counter-regulatory pathways that characterize the pathophysiology of early type 2 diabetes. To some extent, this protection explains why hypoglycaemic episodes in intensively treated individuals with type 2 diabetes, when they occur, are rarely severe. As diabetes progresses and therapy intensifies to achieve recommended glycaemic goals, hypoglycaemia frequency and severity increase. Thus, when it comes to instituting intensive therapy, fear of hypoglycaemia may contribute to health-care providers' 'clinical inertia'. Because maintaining glycaemic control is so important to both public and individual health, many new therapies and technologies have been developed. This manuscript reviews and considers whether these advancements in therapy make glycaemic goals easier to achieve by minimizing hypoglycaemia. Putting the hypoglycaemia experienced by type 2 diabetes patients into appropriate clinical perspective, the impact of recent progress made in pharmacotherapy, drug delivery systems, and BG monitoring on hypoglycaemia incidence is largely positive. The extent to which this progress can effect improvement over traditional therapies will, however, depend upon patient (and provider) education, motivation and behaviour change.

Why, when and how to initiate insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes is characterised by insulin resistance and progressive beta-cell deterioration. As beta-cell function declines, most patients with type 2 diabetes will require insulin therapy. Clinical studies show that tight control of blood glucose levels prevents the development of the microvascular and macrovascular complications caused by diabetes. Insulin is the most potent drug currently available to achieve tight glycaemic control; however, often it is not used early or aggressively enough for patients to achieve the glycaemic targets needed to prevent chronic complications. New basal insulin analogues and premixed insulin analogues, which have more physiological time-action profiles compared with human insulin formulations, offer flexibility and convenience, thereby improving quality of life. It is crucial that doctors initiate insulin therapy as soon as other diabetes therapies are no longer effective. This article reviews the improvements provided by basal insulin analogues, premixed insulin analogues, and insulin delivery systems; provides sample algorithms for initiating and titrating the various insulin analogue preparations; and discusses how to individualise treatment regimens to maximise outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes.