Insulin Therapy in Hospitalized Patients

Perioperative Management of the Patient with Diabetes Mellitus

Perioperative evaluation and management of diabetes mellitus is vital to minimize adverse complications before, during, and after surgery. It requires a multidisciplinary approach including the surgery team, anesthesia, endocrinology or internal medicine, and other specialties as needed. This article will discuss the effects of surgery and anesthesia on blood glucose, preoperative evaluation of the person with diabetes, glycemic targets for surgery, adjustment of diabetes medications the day before surgery, in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative areas, management of blood glucose in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods, and management of hypoglycemia.

Prevalence of Functional Food Use for Self-Reported Type 2 Diabetes Management in a Cohort of Hispanic Adults: Results of an Online Survey

BACKGROUND

Hispanic adults are disproportionately diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and are more likely to use functional foods for T2DM management compared with non-Hispanic White adults. Functional foods contain biologically active ingredients associated with physiological health benefits for preventing and managing chronic disease. Understanding which functional foods are used for T2DM management among Hispanic adults is essential for planning interventions.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify the self-reported types, frequency of use, and reasons for functional food use among Hispanic and Latino adults with T2DM; and to examine the demographic characteristics and T2DM-related health behaviors associated with using functional foods.

DESIGN

This cross-sectional study used an online Qualtrics survey to assess the types of foods used to manage T2DM, demographic characteristics, and T2DM-related health behaviors.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults (n = 488) 18 years or older who used social media, identified as Hispanic or Latino, lived in the United States, and self-reported T2DM were included. The study was conducted in April 2021.

STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED

Multivariable negative binomial regression models were used to assess the association between weekly functional food use, demographic characteristics, and T2DM-related health behaviors.

RESULTS

Participants mean ± SD age was 39.9 ± 10.3 years, they had lived with T2DM for 4.0 ± 3.5 years, and consumed functional foods 2.6 ± 1.9 times/wk. Participants with significantly higher weekly intakes of functional foods were more likely to have a college degree (prevalence rate ratio [PrR] 1.45; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.74), lower perceived health ratings (PrR 1.47; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.78), more frequent blood glucose monitoring (PrR 1.78; 95% CI 1.46 to 2.17), and higher glycated hemoglobin (PrR 1.49; 95% CI 1.24 to 1.81).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that gathering information specific to functional food use and incorporating these foods into diabetes care plans, when applicable, may be beneficial for nutrition professionals working with Hispanic and Latino adults.

International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2024: Insulin and Adjunctive Treatments in Children and Adolescents with Diabetes

The International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD) guidelines represent a rich repository that serves as the only comprehensive set of clinical recommendations for children, adolescents, and young adults living with diabetes worldwide. This chapter builds on the 2022 ISPAD guidelines, and updates recommendations on the principles of intensive insulin regimens, including more intensive forms of multiple daily injections with new-generation faster-acting and ultra-long-acting insulins; a summary of adjunctive medications used alongside insulin treatment that includes details on pramlintide, metformin, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors; and key considerations with regard to access to insulin and affordability to ensure that all persons with diabetes who need insulin can obtain it without financial hardship.

Insulin Infusion Protocols for Blood Glucose Management in Critically Ill Patients: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Continuous insulin infusion is a method for maintaining blood glucose stability in critically ill patients with hyperglycemia. Many insulin infusion protocols have been applied in intensive care units. Understanding the content of these protocols can help clinical staff choose the most appropriate and convenient protocol and promote best practices in managing glucose levels in critically ill adult patients.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the types of insulin infusion therapies performed for blood glucose management in critically ill patients.

METHODS

For this scoping review, 3 Chinese-language and 8 English-language databases were searched for articles published from May 25, 2016, to October 25, 2022.

RESULTS

Twenty-one articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one insulin infusion protocols were examined. Most of the insulin infusion protocols were paper protocols. Fourteen glucose management indicators were included in the 21 protocols. The glucose target range for all 21 protocols ranged from 70 to 180 mg/dL (3.9-10.0 mmol/L). Nurses were primarily responsible for protocol implementation in most protocol development processes. The roles of nurses differed in nurse-led insulin infusion protocols and non-nurse-led insulin infusion protocols.

DISCUSSION

This scoping review indicates an urgent need for more comprehensive glycemic control guidelines for patients receiving critical care. Because insulin infusion protocols are core aspects of blood glucose management guidelines, different population subgroups should also be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse-led guidelines must be based on the best available evidence and should include other variables related to glucose management (eg, patient disease type, medication, and nutrition) in addition to insulin infusion.

Safety and efficacy of non-insulin therapy in non-critically ill hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

INTRODUCTION

Clinical guidelines recommend insulin as the mainstay of therapy for hospitalized patients with diabetes mellitus. The aim of the current study is to evaluate safety and efficacy of non-insulin anti-hyperglycemic therapy in hospitalized patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining treatment of hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes with insulin vs non-insulin therapy. We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library for RCTs published from inception to November 30, 2022. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and hypoglycemic events during hospitalization. This meta-analysis includes two parts, the first is a comparison between insulin and non-insulin therapy and the second is a comparison between insulin only and a combination of insulin+non-insulin therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 14 randomized control studies and 1570 patients were included. There was a lower incidence of 30-day mortality in the insulin+non-insulin group compared with the insulin group without statistical significance, RR 0.64 (95%CI 0.30-1.35). Hypoglycemic events were significantly lower with the non-insulin therapies compared to insulin therapy, RR 0.23 (95%CI 0.09-0.55). Mean daily glucose levels were significantly lower in the insulin+non-insulin group compared to the insulin group by 10.83 mg/dL (95%CI -14.78-(-6.87)).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-insulin either with or without insulin, results in lower rates of hypoglycemia. Non-insulin+insulin is more effective than insulin alone in reducing blood glucose levels. Non-insulin-based therapy is safe and effective for control of hyperglycemia. Insulin combined with non-insulin drugs seems to be the preferred treatment option for the majority of hospitalized patients with type 2 DM in the non-critical care setting.

Clinical impact after implementing an insulin protocol involving a switch to insulin glargine 300 U/ml as basal insulin for inpatient glycaemic control: A retrospective single-centre study

AIMS

To evaluate the benefit and safety of a switch in the basal insulin protocol to glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) on inpatients' overall dysglycemic events. Efficacy and safety data on insulin Gla-300 in the inpatient setting are limited.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study conducted on 7455 patients admitted to acute care (n = 5414) or geriatric and social healthcare (n = 2041) units of the Regional Hospital of Amposta (Spain) between January 2017 and December 2020 who received basal insulin during hospitalization. Hypo- and hyperglycaemic events were indirectly assessed through hospital pharmacy usage of intravenous glucose and vials of rapid-acting intravenous insulin for 27 months after the switch, and the impact on overall dysglycemic events was analysed.

RESULTS

After protocol implementation, patients were mostly treated with Gla-300 (83.06 % in acute care; and 83.44 % in geriatric and social healthcare), and presented a significant decrease in the use of intravenous insulin (-60.80 %, P = 0.005) and glucose (-62.13 %, P < 0.001), which translated into a significantly reduced overall dysglycemic events (-62.25 %, P < 0.001), with a good safety and tolerability profile.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall inpatient dysglycemic events were improved upon the introduction of the new insulin protocol, which calls for the use of Gla-300 as one of the choices of basal insulin for inpatient care.

Blood glucose control with different treatment regimens in type 2 diabetes patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection: A retrospective study

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is closely associated with hyperglycemia and a worse prognosis in patients with a previous diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus. A few studies investigated the effects of diabetes treatment regimens in these patients during hospitalization. Here, we evaluate the impact of insulin and non-insulin therapy on glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes admitted with COVID-19. This is a retrospective study including 359 COVID-19 patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to diabetes treatment during hospitalization. The first group included patients treated with insulin only, and the second group patients treated with other antidiabetic agents with or without insulin. Average blood glucose was higher in the insulin-only treatment group (201 ± 66 mg/dL vs 180 ± 71 mg/dL, P = .004), even after excluding mechanically ventilated patients (192 ± 69 vs 169 ± 59 mg/dL, P = .003). In patients with moderate severity of COVID-19, average blood glucose was also significantly higher in the insulin-only treated group (197 ± 76 vs 168 ± 51 mg/dL, P = .001). Most patients (80%) in the combination treatment group received metformin. Moderately affected COVID-19 patients with type 2 diabetes could safely be treated with antihyperglycemic medications with or without insulin.

[Hospital diabetes management (Update 2023)]

This position statement presents the recommendations of the Austrian Diabetes Association for diabetes management of adult patients during inpatient stay. It is based on the current evidence with respect to blood glucose targets, insulin therapy and treatment with oral/injectable antidiabetic drugs during inpatient hospitalization. Additionally, special circumstances such as intravenous insulin therapy, concomitant therapy with glucocorticoids and use of diabetes technology during hospitalization are discussed.

Challenges in hyperglycemia management in critically ill patients with COVID-19

Hyperglycemia is commonly associated with adverse outcomes especially in patients requiring intensive care unit stay. Data from the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic indicates that individuals with diabetes appear to be at similar risk for COVID-19 infection to those without diabetes but are more likely to experience increased morbidity and mortality. The proposed hypothesis for hyperglycemia in COVID-19 include insulin resistance, critical illness hyperglycemia (stress- induced hyperglycemia) secondary to high levels of hormones like cortisol and catecholamines that counteract insulin action, acute cytokine storm and pancreatic cell dysfunction. Diabetic patients are more likely to have severe hyperglycemic complications including diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state. Management of hyperglycemia in COVID-19 is often complicated by use of steroids, prolonged total parenteral or enteral nutrition, frequent acute hyperglycemic events, and restrictions with fluid management due to acute respiratory distress syndrome. While managing hyperglycemia special attention should be paid to mode of insulin delivery, frequency of glucose monitoring based on patient and caregiver safety thereby minimizing exposure and conserving personal protective equipment. In this article we describe the pathophysiology of hyperglycemia, challenges encountered in managing hyperglycemia, and review some potential solutions to address them.

A continuous intravenous insulin infusion protocol to manage high-dose methylprednisolone-induced hyperglycemia in patients with severe COVID-19

Background

Many patients with severe COVID-19 have impaired glucose tolerance, and steroid therapy is a standard treatment. Thus, good glycemic control is important and correlates with better patient outcomes. We began using a continuous intravenous insulin infusion protocol for glycemic control whose infusion rate changes based on the currently measured value and previous value. This study aimed to evaluate this protocol for COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation.

Methods

This single-center, retrospective, case control study was conducted on all adult patients who required mechanical ventilation for severe COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to our critical care center from April 1, 2020 through June 20, 2021. Blood glucose levels were measured in all patients every 4 h after admission. We started using the insulin infusion protocol from August 1, 2020. Patients before starting the protocol comprised the non-protocol group and those after starting the protocol comprised the protocol group. Blood glucose levels and hypo- or hyperglycemia events were compared between groups. We also surveyed ICU nurses about their experience using the protocol.

Results

During the study period, 173 patients with COVID-19 were admitted. After 15 patients were excluded for several reasons, the study included 158 patients: non-protocol group (n = 14) and protocol group (n = 144). In the initial phase (days 1–2), blood glucose levels of the protocol group were higher compared with the non-protocol group, and as the number of measurements increased, blood glucose levels were gradually brought under control within the target range in the protocol group. Almost no hypoglycemic events (blood glucose < 80 mg/dL) were detected in either group. The rate of hyperglycemia (blood glucose > 300 mg/dL) was about 5–10% in the initial phase in the protocol group and about 10–15% in the early phase (days 3–4) in the non-protocol group. The questionnaire survey revealed that 80% of ICU nurses responded favorably.

Conclusions

This insulin protocol gradually brought the blood glucose level within target levels in severe COVID-19 patients treated with high-dose steroid. Some hyperglycemia events were detected despite patients being under the protocol in the initial phase, and thus, minor modifications of the protocol might be required in the initial phase.

The Role of the Diabetes Care and Education Specialist in the Hospital Setting

It is the position of Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists that all inpatient interdisciplinary teams include a diabetes care and education specialist to lead or support quality improvement initiatives that affect persons hospitalized with diabetes and/or hyperglycemia. This encompasses not only patient, family, and caregiver education but also education of interdisciplinary team members and achievement of diabetes-related organizational quality metrics and performance outcomes.

Low ALT values amongst hospitalized patients are associated with increased risk of hypoglycemia and overall mortality: a retrospective, big-data analysis of 51 831 patients

BACKGROUND

Sarcopenia and frailty influence clinical patients' outcomes. Low alanine aminotransferase (ALT) serum activity is a surrogate marker for sarcopenia and frailty. In-hospital hypoglycemia is associated, also with worse clinical outcomes.

AIM

We evaluated the association between low ALT, risk of in-hospital hypoglycemia and subsequent mortality.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort analysis.

METHODS

We included patients hospitalized in a tertiary hospital between 2007 and 2019. Patients' data were retrieved from their electronic medical records.

RESULTS

The cohort included 51 831 patients (average age 70.88). The rate of hypoglycemia was 10.8% (amongst diabetics 19.4% whereas in non-diabetics 8.3%). The rate of hypoglycemia was higher amongst patients with ALT < 10 IU/l in the whole cohort (14.3% vs. 10.4%, P < 0.001) as well as amongst diabetics (24.6% vs. 18.8%, P < 0.001). Both the overall and in-hospital mortality were higher in the low ALT group (57.7% vs. 39.1% P < 0.001 and 4.3% vs. 3.2%, P < 0.001). A propensity score matching, after which a regression model was performed, showed that patients with ALT levels < 10 IU/l had higher risk of overall mortality (HR = 1.21, CI 1.13-1.29, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Low ALT values amongst hospitalized patients are associated with increased risk of in-hospital hypoglycemia and overall mortality.

An Initiative to Reduce Insulin-Related Adverse Drug Events in a Children's Hospital

OBJECTIVES

Adverse drug events (ADEs) during hospitalization are common. Insulin-related events, specifically, are frequent and preventable. At a tertiary children's hospital, we sought to reduce insulin-related ADEs by decreasing the median event rate of hyper- and hypoglycemia over a 12-month period.

METHODS

Using Lean 6 σ methodology, we instituted a house-wide process change from a single-order ordering process to a pro re nata (PRN) standing order process. The standardized process included parameters for administration and intervention, enabling physician and nursing providers to practice at top of licensure. Automated technology during dose calculation promoted patient safety during dual verification processes. Control charts tracked rates of insulin-related ADEs, defined as hyperglycemia (glucose level >250 mg/dL) or hypoglycemia (glucose level <65 mg/dL). Events were standardized according to use rates of insulin on each nursing unit. The rates of appropriately timed insulin doses (within 30 minutes of a blood sugar check) were assessed.

RESULTS

Baseline median house-wide frequencies of hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic episodes were 55 and 6.9 events (per 100 rapid-acting insulin days), respectively. The median time to insulin administration was 32 minutes. The implementation of the PRN process reduced the median frequencies of hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic episodes to 45 and 3.8 events, respectively. The median time to insulin administration decreased to 18 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

A PRN ordering process and education decreased insulin-associated ADEs and the time to insulin dosing compared with single-entry processes. Engaging bedside providers was instrumental in reducing insulin-related ADEs. Strategies that decrease the time from patient assessment to drug administration should be studied for other high-risk drugs.

COVID-19 and Diabetes

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most common comorbid conditions in persons with COVID-19 and a risk factor for poor prognosis. The reasons why COVID-19 is more severe in persons with DM are currently unknown although the scarce data available on patients with DM hospitalized because of COVID-19 show that glycemic control is inadequate. The fact that patients with COVID-19 are usually cared for by health professionals with limited experience in the management of diabetes and the need to prevent exposure to the virus may also be obstacles to glycemic control in patients with COVID-19. Effective clinical care should consider various aspects, including screening for the disease in at-risk persons, education, and monitoring of control and complications. We examine the effect of COVID-19 on DM in terms of glycemic control and the restrictions arising from the pandemic and assess management of diabetes and drug therapy in various scenarios, taking into account factors such as physical exercise, diet, blood glucose monitoring, and pharmacological treatment. Specific attention is given to patients who have been admitted to hospital and critically ill patients. Finally, we consider the role of telemedicine in the management of DM patients with COVID-19 during the pandemic and in the future.

The Evolution of Insulin Administration in Type 1 Diabetes

Insulin has been utilized in the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) for 100 years. While there is still no cure for T1D, insulin administration has undergone a remarkable evolution which has contributed to improvements in quality of life and life expectancy in individuals with T1D. The advent of faster-acting and longer-acting insulins allowed for the implementation of insulin regimens more closely resembling normal insulin physiology. These improvements afforded better glycemic control, which is crucial for limiting microvascular complications and improving T1D outcomes. Suspension of insulin delivery in response to actual and forecasted hypoglycemia has improved quality of life and mitigated hypoglycemia without compromising glycemic control. Advances in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin pumps, efforts to model glucose and insulin kinetics, and the application of control theory to T1D have made the automation of insulin delivery a reality. This review will summarize the past, present, and future of insulin administration in T1D.

Inpatient Insulin Pen Implementation, Waste, and Potential Cost Savings: A Community Hospital Experience

BACKGROUND

Insulin pen injectors ("pens") are intended to facilitate a patient's self-administration of insulin and can be used in hospitalized patients as a learning opportunity. Unnecessary or duplicate dispensation of insulin pens is associated with increased healthcare costs.

METHODS

Inpatient dispensation of insulin pens in a 240-bed community hospital between July 2018 and July 2019 was analyzed. We calculated the percentage of insulin pens unnecessarily dispensed for patients who had the same type of insulin pen assigned. The estimated cost of insulin pen waste was calculated. A pharmacist-led task force group implemented hospital-wide awareness and collaborated with hospital leadership to define goals and interventions.

RESULTS

9516 insulin pens were dispensed to 3121 patients. Of the pens dispensed, 6451 (68%) were insulin aspart and 3065 (32%) were glargine. Among patients on insulin aspart, an average of 2.2 aspart pens was dispensed per patient, but only an estimated 1.2 pens/patient were deemed necessary. Similarly, for inpatients prescribed glargine, an average of 2.1 pens/patient was dispensed, but only 1.3 pens/patient were necessary. A number of gaps were identified and interventions were undertaken to reduce insulin pen waste, which resulted in a significant decrease in both aspart (p = 0.0002) and glargine (p = 0.0005) pens/patient over time. Reductions in pen waste resulted in an estimated cost savings of $66 261 per year.

CONCLUSIONS

In a community hospital setting, identification of causes leading to unnecessary insulin dispensation and implementation of hospital-wide staff education led to change in insulin pen dispensation practice. These changes translated into considerable cost savings and facilitated diabetes self-management education.

A randomized trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine in hyperglycemic acute stroke patients receiving intensive care

This pilot, randomized, open-label controlled study compared the basal–bolus regimens of insulin glargine (IG) and neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in stroke patients with hyperglycemia receiving intensive care. The study recruited acute stroke patients requiring intensive care within 72 h (h) of onset and had blood glucose > 200 mg/dL. 50 patients received IG (n = 26) or NPH (n = 24) with added short-acting prandial regular insulin over a 72-h period. The primary end point was the percentage of glucose within 80–180 mg/dL assessed through continuous glucose monitoring. The baseline characteristics were comparable, except the IG had higher glucose pre-randomization than the NPH (290.69 ± 82.31 vs. 246.04 ± 41.76 mg/dL, P = 0.021). The percentage of time with glucose between 80 and 180 mg/dL was 45.88 ± 27.04% in the IG and 53.56 ± 22.89% in the NPH (P = 0.341) and the percentage of glucose reduction was 31.47 ± 17.52% in the IG and 27.28 ± 14.56% in the NPH (P = 0.374). The percentage of time with glucose < 60 mg/dL was 0.14 ± 0.49% in the IG and 0.47 ± 1.74% in the NPH. Poststroke outcomes were not significantly different. In conclusion, IG is safe and equally effective as an NPH-based basal-bolus regimen for acute stroke patients with hyperglycemia receiving intensive care.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02607943. Registered 18/11/2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02607943.

COVID-19 and diabetes: A bidirectional relationship

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causal agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Diabetes is one of the most frequent comorbidities in people with COVID-19 with a prevalence that varies between 7 and 30%. Diabetics infected with SARS-CoV-2 have a higher rate of hospital admission, severe pneumonia, and higher mortality compared to non-diabetic subjects. Chronic hyperglycemia can compromise innate and humoral immunity. Furthermore, diabetes is associated with a low-grade chronic inflammatory state that favours the development of an exaggerated inflammatory response and therefore the appearance of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Recent evidence has shown that SARS-CoV-2 is also capable of causing direct damage to the pancreas that could worsen hyperglycemia and even induce the onset of diabetes in previously non-diabetic subjects. Therapeutic strategies should be aimed at facilitating patient access to the healthcare system. Control of blood glucose and comorbidities must be individualised in order to reduce the incidence of complications and decrease the burden on health systems. In this article we will review the pathophysiological mechanisms that explain the bidirectional relationship between COVID-19 and diabetes mellitus, its implication in the prognosis and management of hyperglycemia in this group of patients.

Inpatient Hyperglycemia Management and COVID-19

Diabetes is one of the most common comorbidities in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Inpatient hyperglycemia during this pandemic has been associated with worse outcomes, so it is mandatory to implement effective glycemic control treatment approaches for inpatients with COVID-19. The shortage of personal protective equipment, the need to prevent staff exposure, or the fact that many of the healthcare professionals might be relatively unfamiliar with the management of hyperglycemia may lead to worse glycemic control and, consequently, a worse prognosis. In order to reduce these barriers, we intend to adapt established recommendations to manage hyperglycemia during this pandemic in critical and noncritical care settings.

Considerations for Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes Patients During Hospitalization: A Narrative Review of What We Need to Know in the Age of Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogs

With the availability of second-generation basal insulin analogs, insulin degludec (100 and 200 units/ml [degludec]) and insulin glargine 300 units/ml (glargine U300), clinicians now have long-acting, efficacious treatment options with stable pharmacokinetic profiles and associated low risks of hypoglycemia that may be desirable for many patients with type 2 diabetes. In this narrative review, we summarize the current evidence on glycemic control in hospitalized patients and review the pharmacokinetic properties of degludec and glargine U300 in relation to the challenges these may pose during the hospitalization of patients with type 2 diabetes who are receiving outpatient regimens involving these newer insulins. Their increased use in clinical practice requires that hospital healthcare professionals (HCPs) have appropriate protocols to transfer patients from these second-generation insulins to formulary insulin on admission, and ensure the safe discharge of patients and transition back to degludec or glargine U300. However, there is no guidance available on this. Based on the authors' clinical experience, we identify key issues to consider when arranging hospital care of such patients. We also summarize the limited available evidence on the potential utility of these second-generation basal insulin analogs in the non-critical inpatient setting and identify avenues for future research. To address current knowledge gaps, it is important that HCPs are educated about the differences between standard formulary insulins and second-generation insulins, and the importance of clear communication during patient transitions.

COVID-19 and diabetes: A bidirectional relationship

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causal agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Diabetes is one of the most frequent comorbidities in people with COVID-19 with a prevalence that varies between 7 and 30%. Diabetics infected with SARS-CoV-2 have a higher rate of hospital admission, severe pneumonia, and higher mortality compared to non-diabetic subjects. Chronic hyperglycemia can compromise innate and humoral immunity. Furthermore, diabetes is associated with a low-grade chronic inflammatory state that favors the development of an exaggerated inflammatory response and therefore the appearance of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Recent evidence has shown that SARS-CoV-2 is also capable of causing direct damage to the pancreas that could worsen hyperglycemia and even induce the onset of diabetes in previously non-diabetic subjects. Therapeutic strategies should be aimed at facilitating patient access to the healthcare system. Control of blood glucose and comorbidities must be individualized in order to reduce the incidence of complications and decrease the burden on health systems. In this article we will review the pathophysiological mechanisms that explain the bidirectional relationship between COVID-19 and diabetes mellitus, its implication in the prognosis and management of hyperglycemia in this group of patients.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) during hospitalization and therapy intensification at discharge in patients with insufficiently controlled type 2 diabetes: results of the phase IV COBALTA trial

INTRODUCTION

This study assessed the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) during hospitalization and therapy intensification at discharge in insufficiently controlled people with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

COBALTA (for its acronym in Spanish, COntrol Basal durante la hospitalizacion y al ALTA) was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase IV trial including 112 evaluable inpatients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled (glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 8%-10%) with basal insulin and/or non-insulin antidiabetic drugs. Patients were treated with a basal-bolus-correction insulin regimen with Gla-300 during the hospitalization and with Gla-300 and/or non-insulin antidiabetics for 6 months after discharge. The primary endpoint was the HbA1c change from baseline to month 6 postdischarge.

RESULTS

HbA1c levels decreased from 8.8%±0.6% at baseline to 7.2%±1.1% at month 6 postdischarge (p<0.001, mean change 1.6%±1.1%). All 7-point blood glucose levels decreased from baseline to 24 hours predischarge (p≤0.001, mean changes from 25.1±66.6 to 63.0±85.4 mg/dL). Fasting plasma glucose also decreased from baseline to 24 hours predischarge (p<0.001), month 3 (p<0.001) and month 6 (p<0.001) postdischarge (mean changes 51.5±90.9, 68.2±96.0 and 77.6±86.4 mg/dL, respectively). Satisfaction was high and hyperglycemia/hypoglycemia perception was low according to the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire at month 6 postdischarge. The incidence of confirmed (glucose<70 mg/dL)/severe hypoglycemia was 25.0% during hospitalization and 59.1% 6 months after discharge. No safety concerns were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Inpatient and intensification therapy at discharge with Gla-300 improved significantly glycemic control of patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled with other basal insulin and/or non-insulin antidiabetic medication, with high treatment satisfaction. Gla-300 could therefore be a treatment choice for hospital and postdischarge diabetes management.