Advances in Managing Type 2 Diabetes in the Elderly: A Focus on Inpatient Care and Transitions of Care

Continuous Glucose Monitoring: An Opportunity for Population-Based Diabetes Management

The increasing prevalence of prediabetes and diabetes in the United States poses a serious threat to the health of the population. Closely associated with obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular disease, a diagnosis of diabetes or prediabetes carries with it life-altering demands. Critically important among these is the requirement for frequent glucose level checks-typically performed with blood obtained from a fingerstick. Innovative real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) technology makes it possible for patients and their clinicians to receive continuous glucose level measurements around the clock without finger sticks. Accruing evidence shows that rtCGM is an effective tool for patients and their clinicians in managing diabetes (ie, maintaining glucose levels within the recommended target range) and in understanding how lifestyle behaviors directly influence glucose levels. In recent years, a number of large payer organizations (eg, private health insurers, employers) have incorporated rtCGM in their diabetes management programs as a means of addressing the dual challenge of achieving/maintaining control of glucose levels and preventing or delaying the onset of complications. Programmatic integrated approaches have been used successfully and cost-effectively for managing other chronic conditions. Incorporating rtCGM in similar integrated approaches in diabetes management may be of value in improving quality outcomes and reducing costs on a population level. The evidence supports broader adoption and continued study to evaluate models that incorporate the use of rtCGM.

Implementation of a Weight-Based Protocol for the Management of Steroid-Induced Hyperglycemia

BACKGROUND

Hyperglycemia is a recognized complication of supraphysiological steroid dosing. There are no consensus guidelines on optimal treatment of steroid-induced hyperglycemia. We assessed the safety of a weight-based insulin protocol for persons treated with supraphysiological doses of steroids to examine the efficacy of using this protocol in patients with diabetes treated with prednisone or methylprednisolone.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

There is uncertainty about the optimal dosing of insulin to manage steroid-induced hyperglycemia; thus, a weight-based protocol was created with the goal of reaching euglycemia faster than current practice in persons with diabetes. Variables such as steroid dosing, baseline glycemic control, and duration of steroid use further complicated the ability to manage these patients.

INNOVATIONS

The interdisciplinary team of diabetes providers and pharmacists worked together to devise a protocol to manage steroid-induced hyperglycemia with the goal of reducing hyperglycemia while avoiding hypoglycemia, as well as to allow for less reliance on endocrine consultation. The protocol used weight, insulin naivety, renal function, blood glucose measurements, and steroid dosing to determine the insulin dose. There was some evidence to suggest the proportion of blood glucose levels more than 200 mg/dL was lower after protocol initiation compared with before protocol initiation (P = 0.053). Several factors decreased the rate of successful outcomes, including minimal primary team participation, accurate completion of calculations based on the protocol, and initiation of the protocol after several days of hyperglycemia.

Discharge pharmacotherapy for Type 2 diabetic inpatients at two hospitals of different tiers in Zhejiang Province, China

Objects

To look into the discharge pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetics admitted to two general hospitals of different ranks and inspect current real-world management of discharge pharmacology and its related factors.

Methods

Type 2 diabetics admitted to a tertiary general hospital (Ningbo Medical Treatment Centre Lihuili Hospital, LHLH) or a secondary general hospital (Simen Hospital, SMH) for intensification of their anti-diabetics were included for retrospective analysis. Patients’ demographics, clinical characteristics, admission diabetes therapy and discharge diabetes pharmacology were analyzed and compared among patients in each hospital as well as between two hospitals.

Results

391 patients from LHLH and 164 patients from SMH were included for analyzing. Compared with patients from LHLH, patients from SMH were older, more illiterate and had higher HbA1c concentrations. While there was a nearly equal split of oral anti-diabetes drugs (OADs)-only and Insulin treatment in LHLH’s discharge pharmacotherapy, insulin treatment dominated SMH’s. Basal-and-bolus insulin assumed the majority of SMH’s insulin regimens but only accounted for less than 20% of LHLH’s. The principal discrepancy in OADs-only treatment existed in the utilization of newer classes of OADs. Cost and body mass index (BMI) were the main differentiating factors among OADs-only treatments while duration, BMI and HbA1c differ among insulin treatments at LHLH. Clinical characteristics didn’t significantly differ among OADs-only treatments and HbA1c was the only differentiating factor among insulin treatments at SMH. Overall, hospital, duration, HbA1c, and vascular diseases were main factors that affect discharge pharmacology.

Conclusions

Great disparities exist in the discharge pharmacotherapy at two hospitals. Diabetes management is mostly glucose-oriented at SMH while multifactorial considerations were reflected in LHLH’s discharge pharmacotherapy. Besides differences in patients’ demographics, medication availability and diagnosis of early-stage vascular complications, lack of practical algorithm for discharge management in T2DM may be the underlying deficiency and a key part for future improvement.