Diabetes Care in the Hospital: Standards of Medical Care

Diabetes Care Volume 43, Supplement 1, January 2020

S193

 

Diabetesd2020
Diabetes Care 2020;43(Suppl. 1):S193–S202 | https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-S015

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20- SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi .org/10.2337/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Among hospitalized patients, both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia are associ- ated with adverse outcomes, including death (1–4). Therefore, careful manage- ment of inpatients with diabetes has direct and immediate benefits. Hospital management of diabetes is facilitated by preadmission treatment of hyperglycemia in patients having elective procedures, a dedicated inpatient diabetes service applying well-developed standards, and careful transition out of the hospital to prearranged outpatient management. These steps can shorten hospital stays and reduce the need for readmission, as well as improve patient outcomes. Some in-depth reviews of hospital care for patients with diabetes have been published (5,6).

HOSPITAL CARE DELIVERY STANDARDS

Considerations on Admission

High-quality hospital care for diabetes requires standards for care delivery, which are best implemented using structured order sets, and quality assurance for process improvement. Unfortunately, “best practice” protocols, reviews, and guidelines (2) are inconsistently implemented within hospitals. To correct this, medical centers striving for optimal inpatient diabetes treatment should establish protocols and structured order sets, which include computerized physician order entry (CPOE).

American Diabetes Association

Recommendations

. 15.1  Perform an A1C test on all patients with diabetes or hyperglycemia (blood glucose .140 mg/dL [7.8 mmol/L]) admitted to the hospital if not performed in the prior 3 months. B

. 15.2  Insulin should be administered using validated written or computerized protocols that allow for predefined adjustments in the insulin dosage based on glycemic fluctuations. C

Suggested citation: American Diabetes Associa- tion. 15. Diabetes care in the hospital: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesd2020. Diabetes Care 2020;43(Suppl. 1):S193-S202

© 2019 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More infor- mation is available at http://www.diabetesjournals .org/content/license.

15. DIABETES CARE IN THE HOSPITAL

S194 Diabetes Care in the Hospital

Diabetes Care Volume 43, Supplement 1, January 2020

Initial orders should state the type of diabetes (i.e., type 1, type 2, gestational diabetes mellitus, pancreatic diabetes) when it is known. Because inpatient treatment and discharge planning are more effective if based on preadmission glycemia, an A1C should be measured on all patients with diabetes or hyperglyce- mia admitted to the hospital if the test has not been performed in the previous 3 months (7–10). In addition, diabetes self-management knowledge and behav- iors should be assessed on admission and diabetes self-management educa- tion provided, if appropriate. Diabetes self-management education should in- clude appropriate skills needed after discharge, such as medication dosing and administration, glucose monitoring, and recognition and treatment of hypogly- cemia (2). There is evidence to support preadmission treatment of hyperglyce- mia in patients scheduled for elective surgery as an effective means of reducing adverse outcomes (11–13).

The National Academy of Medicine recommends CPOE to prevent medication- related errors and to increase efficiency in medication administration (14). A Cochrane review of randomized con- trolled trials using computerized advice to improve glucose control in the hospital found significant improvement in the percentage of time patients spent in the target glucose range, lower mean blood glucose levels, and no increase in hypoglycemia (15). Thus, where feasible, there should be structured order sets that provide computerized advice for glucose control. Electronic insulin order templates also improve mean glucose levels without increasing hy- poglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes, so structured insulin order sets should be incorporated into the CPOE (16,17).

Diabetes Care Providers in the Hospital

Appropriately trained specialists or spe- cialty teams may reduce length of stay, improve glycemic control, and improve outcomes (11,18,19). In addition, the greater risk of 30-day readmission

following hospitalization that has been attributed to diabetes can be reduced, and costs saved, when inpatient care is provided by a specialized diabetes management team (20,21). In a cross- sectional comparison of usual care to management by specialists who re- viewed cases and made recommenda- tions solely through the electronic medical record, rates of both hyper- and hypoglycemia were reduced 30– 40% by electronic “virtual care” (22). Details of team formation are available in The Joint Commission Standards for programs and from the Society of Hos- pital Medicine (23,24).

Even the best orders may not be carried out in a way that improves qual- ity, nor are they automatically updated when new evidence arises. To this end, the Joint Commission has an accredita- tion program for the hospital care of diabetes (23), and the Society of Hospital Medicine has a workbook for program development (24).

GLYCEMIC TARGETS IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS

and Diagnosis of Diabetes,” https://doi .org/10.2337/dc20-S002) (2,25). Hypo- glycemia in hospitalized patients is cate- gorized by blood glucose concentration and clinical correlates (Table 6.4) (26): Level 1 hypoglycemia is a glucose concen- tration 54–70 mg/dL (3.0–3.9 mmol/L). Level 2 hypoglycemia is a blood glucose concentration ,54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L), which is typically the threshold for neuro- glycopenic symptoms. Level 3 hypoglyce- mia is a clinical event characterized by altered mental and/or physical function- ing that requires assistance from another person for recovery. Levels 2 and 3 require immediate correction of low blood glucose.

Glycemic Targets

In a landmark clinical trial, Van den Berghe et al. (27) demonstrated that an intensive intravenous insulin regimen to reach a target glycemic range of 80– 110 mg/dL (4.4–6.1 mmol/L) reduced mortality by 40% compared with a stan- dard approach targeting blood glucose of 180–215 mg/dL (10–12 mmol/L) in crit- ically ill patients with recent surgery (4). This study provided robust evidence that active treatment to lower blood glucose in hospitalized patients had immediate benefits. However, a large, multicenter follow-up study, the Normoglycemia in Intensive Care Evaluation and Survival Using Glucose Algorithm Regulation (NICE-SUGAR) trial (28), led to a recon- sideration of the optimal target range for glucose lowering in critical illness. In this trial critically ill patients randomized to intensive glycemic control (80–110 mg/dL) derived no significant treatment advantage compared with a group with more moderate glycemic targets (140– 180 mg/dL [7.8–10.0 mmol/L]) and in fact had slightly but significantly higher mor- tality (27.5% vs. 25%). The intensively treated group had 10- to 15-fold greater rates of hypoglycemia, which may have contributed to the adverse outcomes noted. The findings from NICE-SUGAR are supported by several meta-analyses, some of which suggest that tight glyce- mic control increases mortality com- pared with more moderate glycemic targets and generally causes higher rates of hypoglycemia (29–31). Based on these results, insulin therapy should be initi- ated for treatment of persistent hyper- glycemia $180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L) and targeted to a glucose range of

Recommendations

. 15.4  Insulin therapy should be initi- ated for treatment of persistent hyperglycemia starting at a thresh- old $180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L). Once insulin therapy is started, a target glucose range of 140–180 mg/dL (7.8–10.0 mmol/L) is rec- ommended for the majority of critically ill patients and non- critically ill patients. A

. 15.5  Morestringentgoals,suchas110– 140 mg/dL (6.1–7.8 mmol/L), may be appropriate for selected patients if they can be achieved without significant hypoglyce- mia. C

Standard Definitions of Glucose Abnormalities
Hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients is defined as blood glucose levels .140 mg/dL (7.8 mmol/L) (2,25). Blood glu- cose levels persistently above this level should prompt conservative interven- tions, such as alterations in diet or changes to medications that cause hy- perglycemia. An admission A1C value $6.5% (48 mmol/mol) suggests that the onset of diabetes preceded hospi- talization (see Section 2 “Classification

Recommendation

15.3 When caring for hospitalized patients with diabetes, consult with a specialized diabetes or glucose management team when possible. C

care.diabetesjournals.org

Diabetes Care in the Hospital S195

140–180 mg/dL (7.8–10.0 mmol/L) for the majority of critically ill patients (2). Although not as well supported by data from randomized controlled trials, these recommendations have been extended to hospitalized patients without critical illness. More stringent goals, such as 110–140 mg/dL (6.1–7.8 mmol/L), may be appropriate for selected patients (e.g., critically ill postsurgical patients or pa- tients with cardiac surgery), as long as they can be achieved without significant hypoglycemia. On the other hand, glu- cose concentrations .180 mg/dL (10 mmol/L) may be acceptable in terminally ill patients, in patients with severe co- morbidities, and in inpatient care set- tings where frequent glucose monitoring or close nursing supervision is not fea- sible. In these patients less aggressive insulin regimens to minimize glucosuria, dehydration, and electrolyte disturban- ces are often more appropriate. Clinical judgment combined with ongoing as- sessment of clinical status, including changes in the trajectory of glucose measures, illness severity, nutritional status, or concomitant medications that might affect glucose levels (e.g., glucocorticoids), should be incorporated into the day-to-day decisions regarding insulin dosing (2).

BEDSIDE BLOOD GLUCOSE MONITORING

In hospitalized patients with diabetes who are eating, glucose monitoring should be performed before meals; in those not eating, glucose monitoring is advised every 4–6 h (2). More frequent blood glucose testing ranging from every 30 min to every 2 h is the required standard for safe use of intravenous insulin. Safety standards for blood glu- cose monitoring that prohibit the sharing of lancets, other testing materials, and needles are mandatory (32).

The vast majority of hospital glucose monitoring is performed using standard glucose monitors and capillary blood taken from fingersticks, similar to the process used by outpatients for home glucose monitoring (33). Point-of-care (POC) meters are not as accurate or as precise as laboratory glucose analyzers, and capillary blood glucose readings are subject to artifact due to perfusion, edema, anemia/erythrocytosis, and sev- eral medications commonly used in the hospital (4,34). The U.S. Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) has established standards for capillary (fingerstick) blood glucose meters used in the ambulatory setting, as well as standards to be applied for POC measures in the hospital (34). The balance between analytic requirements (e.g., accuracy, precision, interference) and clinical re- quirements (rapidity, simplicity, point of care) has not been uniformly resolved (33,35), and most hospitals/medical centers have arrived at their own policies to balance these parameters. It is criti- cally important that devices selected for in-hospital use, and the work flow through which they are applied, have careful analysis of performance and re- liability and ongoing quality assess- ments. Recent studies indicate that POC measures provide adequate infor- mation for usual practice, with only rare instances where care has been com- promised (36,37). Good practice dic- tates that any glucose result that does not correlate with the patient’s clinical status should be confirmed through measurement of a serum sample in the clinical laboratory.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Real-time continuous glucose monitor- ing (CGM) provides frequent measure- ments of interstitial glucose levels, as well as direction and magnitude of glu- cose trends. It has theoretical advantages over POC glucose testing in detecting and reducing the incidence of hypoglycemia in the hospital setting that have been borne out in some but not all studies (38,39). Several inpatient studies have shown that CGM use did not improve glucose control but detected a greater number of hypoglycemic events than POC glucose testing (40,41). However, at present, there are insufficient data on clinical outcomes, safety, or cost effec- tiveness to recommend widespread use of CGM in hospitalized patients (38,40). In particular, more research is needed to support application of CGM for crit- ical care (41). In patients who use CGM in the ambulatory setting for self- management of diabetes, use of CGM for this purpose during hospitalization can be appropriate but requires hospitals to have protocols for guidance, as well as access to specialist care (39). For more information on CGM, see Section 7 “Di- abetes Technology” (https://doi.org/10 .2337/dc20-S007).

GLUCOSE-LOWERING TREATMENT IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS

Recommendations

. 15.6  Basal insulin or a basal plus bolus correction insulin regimen is the preferred treatment for noncriti- cally ill hospitalized patients with poor oral intake or those who are taking nothing by mouth. A An insulin regimen with basal, pran- dial, and correction components is the preferred treatment for non- critically ill hospitalized patients with good nutritional intake. A

. 15.7  Useofonlyaslidingscaleinsulin regimen in the inpatient hospi- tal setting is strongly discour- aged. A

In most instances, insulin is the preferred treatment for hyperglycemia in hospital- ized patients (2). However, in certain circumstances, it may be appropriate to continue home regimens including oral glucose-lowering medications (42). If oral medications are held in the hos- pital, there should be a protocol for resuming them 1–2 days before dis- charge. For patients using insulin, recent reports indicate that inpatient use of insulin pens is safe and may be associated with improved nurse satisfaction com- pared with the use of insulin vials and syringes (43–45). Insulin pens have been the subject of an FDA warning because of potential blood-borne diseases; the warning “For single patient use only” should be rigorously followed (46).

Insulin Therapy

Critical Care Setting

In the critical care setting, continuous intravenous insulin infusion is the most effective method for achieving glycemic targets. Intravenous insulin infusions should be administered based on vali- dated written or computerized protocols that allow for predefined adjustments in the infusion rate, accounting for glycemic fluctuations and insulin dose (2).

Noncritical Care Setting

Outside of critical care units, scheduled insulin regimens are recommended to manage hyperglycemia in patients with diabetes. Regimens using insulin analogs and human insulin result in similar glyce- mic control in the hospital setting (47). The use of subcutaneous rapid- or short-acting insulin before meals, or every 4–6 h if no

S196 Diabetes Care in the Hospital

Diabetes Care Volume 43, Supplement 1, January 2020

preventing and treating hypo- glycemia should be established for each patient. Episodes of hypoglycemia in the hospital should be documented in the medical record and tracked. E

15.9 The treatment regimen should be reviewed and changed as nec- essary to prevent further hypo- glycemia when a blood glucose value of ,70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) is documented. C

meals are given or if the patient is receiving continuous enteral/parenteral nutrition, is indicated to correct hyperglycemia (2). Basal insulin, or a basal plus bolus cor- rection regimen, is the preferred treat- ment for noncritically ill hospitalized patients with poor oral intake or those who are restricted from oral intake. An insulin regimen with basal, prandial, and correction components is the preferred treatment for noncritically ill hospitalized patients with good nutritional intake.

For patients who are eating, insulin injections should align with meals. In such instances, POC glucose testing should be performed immediately before meals. If oral intake is poor, a safer procedure is to administer prandial in- sulin immediately after the patient eats, with the dose adjusted to be appropriate for the amount ingested (47).

A randomized controlled trial has shown that basal-bolus treatment im- proved glycemic control and reduced hospital complications compared with reactive, or sliding scale, insulin regimens (i.e., dosing given in response to elevated glucose rather than pre-emptively) in general surgery patients with type 2 di- abetes (48). Prolonged use of sliding scale insulin regimens as the sole treatment of hyperglycemic inpatients is strongly dis- couraged (2,19).

While there is evidence for using pre- mixed insulin formulations in the outpa- tient setting (49), a recent inpatient study of 70/30 NPH/regular insulin versus basal- bolus therapy showed comparable glyce- mic control but significantly increased hypoglycemia in the group receiving pre- mixed insulin (50). Therefore, premixed insulin regimens are not routinely recom- mended for in-hospital use.

Type 1 Diabetes

For patients with type 1 diabetes, dosing insulin based solely on premeal glucose levels does not account for basal insulin requirements or caloric intake, increas- ing the risk of both hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia. Typically, basal insulin dosing schemes are based on body weight, with some evidence that patients with renal insufficiency should be treated with lower doses (51,52). An insulin regimen with basal and correction com- ponents is necessary for all hospitalized patients with type 1 diabetes, with the addition of prandial insulin if the patient is eating.

Transitioning Intravenous to Subcutaneous Insulin
When discontinuing intravenous insulin, a transition protocol is associated with less morbidity and lower costs of care (53) and is therefore recommended. A patient with type 1 or type 2 diabetes being transitioned to an outpatient sub- cutaneous regimen should receive a dose of subcutaneous basal insulin 2–4 h be- fore the intravenous infusion is discon- tinued. Converting to basal insulin at 60–80% of the daily infusion dose is an effective approach (2,53,54). For patients transitioning to regimens with concen- trated insulin (U-200, U-300, or U-500) in the inpatient setting, it is important to ensure correct dosing by utilizing an individual pen and cartridge for each patient and by meticulous supervision of the dose administered (55,56). New studies support the use of closed-loop insulin delivery with linked pump/sensor devices to control blood glucose in se- lected groups of hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes (57,58). The effect of closed-loop treatment on clinical out- comes, the best application of these devices, and cost-effectiveness of this approach are still to be determined.

Noninsulin Therapies

The safety and efficacy of noninsulin glucose-lowering therapies in the hospital setting is an area of active research (59). Several recent randomized trials have demonstrated the potential effectiveness of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor ago- nists and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors in specific groups of hospitalized patients (60–63). However, an FDA bulletin states that providers should consider discon- tinuing saxagliptin and alogliptin in peo- ple who develop heart failure (64).

Sodium–glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors should be avoided in cases of severe illness, in patients with ketonemia or ketonuria, and during prolonged fast- ing and surgical procedures (5). Until safety and effectiveness are established, SGLT2 inhibitors are not recommended for routine in-hospital use.

HYPOGLYCEMIA

Patients with or without diabetes may experience hypoglycemia in the hospital setting. While hypoglycemia is associated with increased mortality (65), in many cases it is a marker of underlying disease rather than the cause of fatality. However, hypoglycemia is a severe consequence of dysregulated metabolism and/or diabetes treatment, and it is imperative that it be minimized in hospitalized patients. Many episodes of hypoglycemia among inpa- tients are preventable. Therefore, a hy- poglycemia prevention and management protocol should be adopted and imple- mented by each hospital or hospital system. A standardized hospital-wide, nurse-initiated hypoglycemia treatment protocol should be in place to immedi- ately address blood glucose levels of ,70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L). In addition, individ- ualized plans for preventing and treating hypoglycemia for each patient should also be developed. An American Diabetes Association (ADA) consensus statement recommends that a patient’s treatment regimen be reviewed any time a blood glucose value of ,70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) occurs, because such readings often pre- dict subsequent level 3 hypoglycemia (2). Episodes of hypoglycemia in the hospital should be documented in the medical record and tracked (2).

Triggering Events and Prevention of Hypoglycemia
Insulin is one of the most common drugs causing adverse events in hospitalized patients, and errors in insulin dosing and/or administration occur relatively frequently (66,67). Beyond insulin dosing errors, common preventable sources of iatrogenic hypoglycemia are improper prescribing of other glucose-lowering medications, inappropriate management of the first episode of hypoglycemia, and nutrition-insulin mismatch, often related

Recommendations

15.8 Ahypoglycemiamanagementpro- tocol should be adopted and implemented by each hospital or hospital system. A plan for

care.diabetesjournals.org

Diabetes Care in the Hospital S197

to an unexpected interruption of nutri- tion. A recent study describes acute kid- ney injury as an important risk factor for hypoglycemia in the hospital (68), possibly as a result of decreased insulin clearance. Studies of “bundled” preventive thera- pies, including proactive surveillance of glycemic outliers and an interdisciplinary data-driven approach to glycemic man- agement, showed that hypoglycemic episodes in the hospital could be pre- vented. Compared with baseline, two such studies found that hypoglycemic events fell by 56–80% (69,70). The Joint Commission recommends that all hypo- glycemic episodes be evaluated for a root cause and the episodes be aggre- gated and reviewed to address systemic issues (23).

In addition to errors with insulin treat- ment, iatrogenic hypoglycemia may be induced by a sudden reduction of corti- costeroid dose, reduced oral intake, eme- sis, inappropriate timing of short- or rapid- acting insulin in relation to meals, re- duced infusion rate of intravenous dextrose, unexpected interruption of enteral or parenteral feedings, and al- tered ability of the patient to report symptoms (5).

Predictors of Hypoglycemia

In ambulatory patients with diabetes, it is well established that an episode of severe hypoglycemia increases the risk for a subsequent event, in part be- cause of impaired counterregulation (71,72). This relationship also holds for inpatients. For example, in a study of hospitalized patients treated for hyper- glycemia, 84% who had an episode of “severe hypoglycemia” (defined as ,40 mg/dL [2.2 mmol/L]) had a preceding episode of hypoglycemia (,70 mg/dL [3.9 mmol/L]) during the same admission (73). In another study of hypoglyce- mic episodes (defined as ,50 mg/dL [2.8 mmol/L]), 78% of patients were using basal insulin, with the incidence of hypoglycemia peaking between mid- night and 6:00 A.M. Despite recognition of hypoglycemia, 75% of patients did not have their dose of basal insulin changed before the next insulin administration (74).

Recently, several groups have devel- oped algorithms to predict episodes of hypoglycemia among inpatients (75,76). Models such as these are potentially important and, once validated for gen- eral use, could provide a valuable tool to

reduce rates of hypoglycemia in hospi- talized patients.

MEDICAL NUTRITION THERAPY IN THE HOSPITAL

The goals of medical nutrition therapy in the hospital are to provide adequate calories to meet metabolic demands, optimize glycemic control, address per- sonal food preferences, and facilitate creation of a discharge plan. The ADA does not endorse any single meal plan or specified percentages of macronutrients. Current nutrition recommendations ad- vise individualization based on treatment goals, physiological parameters, and medication use. Consistent carbohydrate meal plans are preferred by many hos- pitals as they facilitate matching the prandial insulin dose to the amount of carbohydrate consumed (77). For enteral nutritional therapy, diabetes-specific for- mulas appear to be superior to standard formulas in controlling postprandial glu- cose, A1C, and the insulin response (78).

When the nutritional issues in the hospital are complex, involvement of a registered dietitian nutritionist can con- tribute to patient care by integrating information about the patient’s clinical condition, meal planning, and lifestyle habits and by establishing realistic treat- ment goals after discharge. Orders should also indicate that the meal delivery and nutritional insulin coverage should be coordinated, as their variability often creates the possibility of hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic events.

SELF-MANAGEMENT IN THE HOSPITAL

Diabetes self-management in the hospi- tal may be appropriate for specific pa- tients (79,80). Candidates include both adolescent and adult patients who suc- cessfully conduct self-management of diabetes at home, and whose cognitive and physical skills needed to successfully self-administer insulin and perform self- monitoring of blood glucose are not compromised. In addition, they should have adequate oral intake, be proficient in carbohydrate estimation, use multiple daily insulin injections or continuous sub- cutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), have stable insulin requirements, and understand sick- day management. If self-management is to be used, a protocol should include a re- quirement that the patient, nursing staff, and physician agree that patient self-

management is appropriate. If CSII or CGM is to be used, hospital policy and procedures delineating guidelines for CSII therapy, including the changing of infusion sites, are advised (39,81).

STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL SITUATIONS

Enteral/Parenteral Feedings

For patients receiving enteral or paren- teral feedings who require insulin, the regimen should include coverage of basal, prandial, and correctional needs. It is particularly important that patients with type 1 diabetes continue to receive basal insulin even if feedings are discon- tinued. A reasonable estimate of basal needs can be made from the preadmis- sion dose of long-acting or intermediate insulin or a percentage of the total daily requirements established in the hospital (usually 30–50% of the total daily dose of insulin). In the absence of previous in- sulin dosing, a reasonable starting point is to use 5 units of NPH/detemir insulin subcutaneously every 12 h or 10 units of insulin glargine every 24 h (82).

For patients receiving continuous tube feedings, the total daily nutritional com- ponent may be calculated as 1 unit of insulin for every 10–15 g carbohydrate per day or as a percentage of the total daily dose of insulin when the patient is being fed (usually 50–70% of the total daily dose of insulin). Correctional insulin should also be administered subcutane- ously every 6 h using human regular insulin or every 4 h using a rapid-acting insulin such as lispro, aspart, or glulisine.

For patients receiving enteral bolus feedings, approximately 1 unit of regular human insulin or rapid-acting insulin per 10–15 g carbohydrate should be given subcutaneously before each feeding. Correctional insulin coverage should be added as needed before each feeding.

For patients receiving continuous pe- ripheral or central parenteral nutrition, human regular insulin may be added to the solution, particularly if .20 units of correctional insulin have been required in the past 24 h. A starting dose of 1 unit of human regular insulin for every 10 g dextrose has been recommended (83), and should be adjusted daily in the solution. Correctional insulin should be administered subcutaneously. For full enteral/parenteral feeding guidance, the reader is encouraged to consult re- view articles detailing this topic (2,84).

S198 Diabetes Care in the Hospital

Diabetes Care Volume 43, Supplement 1, January 2020

Glucocorticoid Therapy

The prevalence of glucocorticoid therapy in hospitalized patients can approach 10%, and these medications can induce hyperglycemia in patients with and with- out antecedent diabetes (85). Glucocor- ticoid type and duration of action must be considered in determining insulin treatment regimens. Daily ingestion of short-acting glucocorticoids such as prednisone reach peak plasma levels in 4–6 h (86) but have pharmacologic actions that last through the day. Pa- tients on morning steroid regimens have disproportionate hyperglycemia during the day, but they frequently reach nor- mal blood glucose levels overnight re- gardless of treatment (85). In subjects on once-daily steroids, prandial insulin dosing, often with intermediate-acting (NPH) insulin, is a standard approach. For long-acting glucocorticoids such as dexa- methasone and multidose or continuous glucocorticoid use, long-acting insulin may be required to control fasting blood glucose (42,84). For higher doses of glucocorticoids, increasing doses of pran- dial and correctional insulin, sometimes in extraordinary amounts, are often needed in addition to basal insulin (87). Whatever orders are started, ad- justments based on anticipated changes in glucocorticoid dosing and POC glucose test results are critical.

Perioperative Care

Many standards for perioperative care lack a robust evidence base. However, the following approach (88) may be considered:

1. The target range for blood glucose in the perioperative period should be 80–180 mg/dL (4.4–10.0 mmol/L).

2. A preoperative risk assessment should be performed for patients with diabe- tes who are at high risk for ischemic heart disease and those with auto- nomic neuropathy or renal failure.

3. Metformin should be withheld on the day of surgery.

4. Withhold any other oral glucose-lowering agents the morning of surgery or pro- cedure and give half of NPH dose or 60–80% doses of long-acting analog or pump basal insulin.

5. Monitor blood glucose at least every 4–6 h while patient is taking nothing by mouth and dose with short- or rapid- acting insulin as needed.

A recent review concluded that peri- operative glycemic control tighter than 80–180 mg/dL (4.4–10.0 mmol/L) did not improve outcomes and was associated with more hypoglycemia (89); therefore, in general, tighter glycemic targets are not advised. Evidence from a recent study indicates that compared with usual dosing, a reduction of insulin given the evening before surgery by ;25% was more likely to achieve perioperative blood glucose levels in the target range with lower risk for hypoglycemia (90).

In noncardiac general surgery pa- tients, basal insulin plus premeal short- or rapid-acting insulin (basal-bolus) coverage has been associated with im- proved glycemic control and lower rates of perioperative complications compared with the reactive, sliding scale regimens (short- or rapid-acting insulin coverage only with no basal insulin dosing) (48,91).

Diabetic Ketoacidosis and Hyperosmolar Hyperglycemic State There is considerable variability in the presentation of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic states, ranging from euglycemia or mild hyperglycemia and acidosis to severe hyperglycemia, dehydration, and coma; therefore, individualization of treatment based on a careful clinical and laboratory assessment is needed (92–95).

Management goals include restora- tion of circulatory volume and tissue perfusion, resolution of hyperglycemia, and correction of electrolyte imbalance and acidosis. It is also important to treat any correctable underlying cause of DKA such as sepsis, myocardial infarction, or stroke. In critically ill and mentally obtunded patients with DKA or hyper- osmolar hyperglycemia, continuous in- travenous insulin is the standard of care. Successful transition of patients from intravenous to subcutaneous insulin re- quires administration of basal insulin 2–4 h prior to the intravenous insulin being stopped to prevent recurrence of ketoacidosis and rebound hyperglycemia (95). There is no significant difference in outcomes for intravenous human regular insulin versus subcutaneous rapid-acting analogs when combined with aggressive fluid management for treating mild or moderate DKA (96). Patients with un- complicated DKA may sometimes be treated with subcutaneous insulin in the emergency department or step-

down units (97), an approach that may be safer and more cost-effective than treatment with intravenous insulin (98). If subcutaneous insulin adminis- tration is used, it is important to pro- vide adequate fluid replacement, frequent bedside testing, appropriate treatment of any concurrent infections, and appropriate follow-up to avoid re- current DKA. Several studies have shown that the use of bicarbonate in patients with DKA made no difference in resolu- tion of acidosis or time to discharge, and its use is generally not recommended (99). For further information regarding treatment, refer to recent in-depth re- views (5).

TRANSITION FROM THE HOSPITAL TO THE AMBULATORY SETTING

A structured discharge plan tailored to the individual patient may reduce length of hospital stay and readmission rates and increase patient satisfaction (100). Discharge planning should begin at ad- mission and be updated as patient needs change.

Transition from the acute care setting presents risks for all patients. Inpatients may be discharged to varied settings, including home (with or without visiting nurse services), assisted living, rehabili- tation, or skilled nursing facilities. For the patient who is discharged to home or to assisted living, the optimal program will need to consider diabetes type and se- verity, effects of the patient’s illness on blood glucose levels, and the patient’s capacities and preferences. See Section 12 “Older Adults” (https://doi.org/10 .2337/dc20-S012) for more information.

An outpatient follow-up visit with the primary care provider, endocrinologist, or diabetes educator within 1 month of discharge is advised for all patients ex- periencing hyperglycemia in the hospital. If glycemic medications are changed or glucose control is not optimal at dis- charge, an earlier appointment (in 1– 2 weeks) is preferred, and frequent contact may be needed to avoid hyper- glycemia and hypoglycemia. A recently described discharge algorithm for glyce- mic medication adjustment based on admission A1C was found useful to

Recommendation

15.10 Thereshouldbeastructureddis- charge plan tailored to the in- dividual patient with diabetes. B

care.diabetesjournals.org

Diabetes Care in the Hospital S199

guide treatment decisions and signif- icantly improved A1C after discharge (8). Therefore, if an A1C from the prior 3 months is unavailable, measuring the A1C in all patients with diabetes or hy- perglycemia admitted to the hospital is recommended.

Clear communication with outpatient providers either directly or via hospital discharge summaries facilitates safe transitions to outpatient care. Providing information regarding the cause of hy- perglycemia (or the plan for determining the cause), related complications and comorbidities, and recommended treat- ments can assist outpatient providers as they assume ongoing care.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) recommends that, at a minimum, discharge plans include the following (101):

Medication Reconciliation

c The patient’s medications must be cross-checked to ensure that no chronic medications were stopped and to ensure the safety of new prescriptions.

c Prescriptions for new or changed med- ication should be filled and reviewed with the patient and family at or before discharge.

Structured Discharge Communication

c Information on medication changes, pending tests and studies, and follow- up needs must be accurately and promptly communicated to outpa- tient physicians.

c Discharge summaries should be transmitted to the primary care pro- vider as soon as possible after dis- charge.

c Scheduling follow-up appointments prior to discharge increases the likeli- hood that patients will attend.

It is recommended that the following areas of knowledge be reviewed and addressed prior to hospital discharge:

c Identification of the health care pro- vider who will provide diabetes care after discharge.

c Level of understanding related to the diabetes diagnosis, self-monitoring of blood glucose, home blood glucose goals, and when to call the provider.

c Definition, recognition, treatment, and prevention of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia.

c Information on making healthy food choices at home and referral to an outpatient registered dietitian nutri- tionist to guide individualization of meal plan, if needed. If relevant, when and how to take blood glucose– lowering medications, including insulin administration.

c Sick-day management.
c Proper use and disposal of needles and

syringes.

It is important that patients be pro- vided with appropriate durable med- ical equipment, medications, supplies (e.g., blood glucose test strips), and prescriptions along with appropriate education at the time of discharge in order to avoid a potentially dangerous hiatus in care.

PREVENTING ADMISSIONS AND READMISSIONS

In patients with diabetes, the hospital readmission rate is between 14% and 20%, nearly twice that in patients without diabetes (102,103). This reflects increased disease burden for patients and has im- portant financial implications. Of patients with diabetes who are hospitalized, 30% have two or more hospital stays, and these admissions account for over 50% of in- patient costs for diabetes (104). Factors contributing to readmission include male sex, longer duration of prior hos- pitalization, number of previous hospital- izations, number and severity of comorbidities, and lower socioeconomic and/or educational status; scheduled home health visits and timely outpatient follow-up reduce rates of readmission (102,103). While there is no standard to prevent readmissions, several success- ful strategies have been reported (103). These include targeting ketosis-prone patients with type 1 diabetes (105), in- sulin treatment of patients with admission A1C .9% (75 mmol/mol) (106), and use of a transitional care model (107). For people with diabetic kidney disease, collaborative patient-centered medical homes may decrease risk-adjusted read- mission rates (108). A recently published algorithm based on patient demographic and clinical characteristics had only mod- erate predictive power but identifies a promising future strategy (109).

Age is also an important risk factor in hospitalization and readmission among patients with diabetes. Insulin-treated

patients 80 years of age or older are more than twice as likely as those 45–64 years of age to visit the emergency department and nearly five times as likely to be admitted for insulin-related hypoglycemia (110). One approach to reducing insulin-related morbidity in older adults with type 2 diabetes is to substitute oral agents for insulin in patients in whom these drugs are effective. Among elderly patients in long-term care facilities, there was no significant difference in glycemic control between those taking basal insulin and those on oral glucose-lowering medica- tions (111). In addition, many older adults with diabetes are overtreated (112), with half of those maintaining an A1C ,7% (53 mmol/mol) being treated with insulin or a sulfonylurea, which are associated with hypoglycemia. To further lower the risk of hypoglycemia- related admissions in older adults, providers should consider relaxing A1C targets to 8% (64 mmol/mol) or 8.5% (69 mmol/mol) in patients with shortened life expectancies and signif- icant comorbidities (refer to Section 12 “Older Adults,” https://doi.org/10 .2337/dc20-S012, for detailed criteria).

References

1. ClementS,BraithwaiteSS,MageeMF,etal.; Diabetes in Hospitals Writing Committee. Man- agement of diabetes and hyperglycemia in hospitals [published corrections appear in Di- abetes Care 2004;27:856 and Diabetes Care 2004;27:1255]. Diabetes Care 2004;27:553– 591

2. Moghissi ES, Korytkowski MT, DiNardo M, et al.; American Association of Clinical Endocri- nologists; American Diabetes Association. Amer- ican Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American Diabetes Association consensus state- ment on inpatient glycemic control. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1119–1131

3. Reference removed in proof
4. Reference removed in proof
5. Umpierrez G, Korytkowski M. Diabetic emergenciesdketoacidosis, hyperglycaemic hy- perosmolar state and hypoglycaemia. Nat Rev En- docrinol 2016;12:222–232
6. BogunM,InzucchiSE.Inpatientmanagement of diabetes and hyperglycemia. Clin Ther 2013; 35:724–733
7. Pasquel FJ, Gomez-Huelgas R, Anzola I, et al. Predictive value of admission hemoglobin A1c on inpatient glycemic control and response to in- sulin therapy in medicine and surgery patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2015;38: e202–e203
8. Umpierrez GE, Reyes D, Smiley D, et al. Hospital discharge algorithm based on admission HbA1c for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2014;37:2934– 2939

S200 Diabetes Care in the Hospital

Diabetes Care Volume 43, Supplement 1, January 2020

9. Carpenter DL, Gregg SR, Xu K, Buchman TG, Coopersmith CM. Prevalence and impact of un- known diabetes in the ICU. Crit Care Med 2015; 43:e541–e550

10. Rhee MK, Safo SE, Jackson SL, et al. Inpatient glucose values: determining the nondiabetic range and use in identifying patients at high risk for diabetes. Am J Med 2018;131:443.e11– 443.e24

11. Garg R, Schuman B, Bader A, et al. Effect of preoperative diabetes management on glycemic control and clinical outcomes after elective surgery. Ann Surg 2018;267:858–862

12. van den Boom W, Schroeder RA, Manning MW, Setji TL, Fiestan G-O, Dunson DB. Effect of A1C and glucose on postoperative mortality in noncardiac and cardiac surgeries. Diabetes Care 2018;41:782–788

13. Setji T, Hopkins TJ, Jimenez M, et al. Ration- alization, development, and implementation of a preoperative diabetes optimization program de- signed to improve perioperative outcomes and reduce cost. Diabetes Spectr 2017;30:217–223 14. Institute of Medicine. Preventing Medica- tion Errors. Aspden P, Wolcott J, Bootman JL, Cronenwett LR, Eds. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2007

15. Gillaizeau F, Chan E, Trinquart L, et al. Com- puterized advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;11:CD002894

16. Wexler DJ, Shrader P, Burns SM, Cagliero E. Effectiveness of a computerized insulin order template in general medical inpatients with type 2 diabetes: a cluster randomized trial. Di- abetes Care 2010;33:2181–2183

17. Schnipper JL, Liang CL, Ndumele CD, Pendergrass ML. Effects of a computerized order set on the inpatient management of hypergly- cemia: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Endocr Pract 2010;16:209–218

18. Wang YJ, Seggelke S, Hawkins RM, et al. Impact of glucose management team on out- comes of hospitalization in patients with type 2 diabetes admitted to the medical service. Endocr Pract 2016;22:1401–1405

19. Draznin B, Gilden J, Golden SH, et al.; PRIDE investigators. Pathways to quality inpatient man- agement of hyperglycemia and diabetes: a call to action. Diabetes Care 2013;36:1807–1814

20. Bansal V, Mottalib A, Pawar TK, et al. In- patient diabetes management by specialized diabetes team versus primary service team in non-critical care units: impact on 30-day read- mission rate and hospital cost. BMJ Open Di- abetes Res Care 2018;6:e000460

21. Ostling S, Wyckoff J, Ciarkowski SL, et al. The relationship between diabetes mellitus and 30-day readmission rates. Clin Diabetes Endo- crinol 2017;3:3

22. Rushakoff RJ, Sullivan MM, MacMaster HW, et al. Association between a virtual glucose management service and glycemic control in hospitalized adult patients: an observational study. Ann Intern Med 2017;166:621–627

23. Arnold P, Scheurer D, Dake AW, et al. Hos- pital guidelines for diabetes management and the Joint Commission-American Diabetes Asso- ciation inpatient diabetes certification. Am J Med Sci 2016;351:333–341

24. Society of Hospital Medicine. Clinical Tools, Glycemic Control Implementation Toolkit.

Accessed 28 October 2019. Available from https://www.hospitalmedicine.org/clinical-topics/ glycemic-control/
25. Umpierrez GE, Hellman R, Korytkowski MT, et al.; Endocrine Society. Management of hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients in non-critical care setting: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012;97:16–38

26. Agiostratidou G, Anhalt H, Ball D, et al. Standardizing clinically meaningful outcome measures beyond HbA1c for type 1 diabetes: a consensus report of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the American Asso- ciation of Diabetes Educators, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, JDRF International, The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, the Pediatric Endo- crine Society, and the T1D Exchange. Diabetes Care 2017;40:1622–1630

27. van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1359–1367 28. Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY, et al.; NICE- SUGAR Study Investigators. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill pa- tients. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1283–1297

29. Kansagara D, Fu R, Freeman M, Wolf F, Helfand M. Intensive insulin therapy in hospi- talized patients: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2011;154:268–282

30. Sathya B, Davis R, Taveira T, Whitlatch H, Wu W-C. Intensity of peri-operative glycemic control and postoperative outcomes in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2013;102:8–15

31. Umpierrez G, Cardona S, Pasquel F, et al. Randomized controlled trial of intensive versus conservative glucose control in patients under- going coronary artery bypass graft surgery: GLUCO-CABG trial. Diabetes Care 2015;38: 1665–1672

32. Cobaugh DJ, Maynard G, Cooper L, et al. Enhancing insulin-use safety in hospitals: prac- tical recommendations from an ASHP Founda- tion expert consensus panel. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2013;70:1404–1413

33. Rice MJ, Coursin DB. Glucose meters: here today, gone tomorrow? Crit Care Med 2016;44: e97–e100
34. Rice MJ, Smith JL, Coursin DB. Glucose measurement in the ICU: regulatory intersects reality. Crit Care Med 2017;45:741–743

35. Klonoff DC, Draznin B, Drincic A, et al. PRIDE statement on the need for a moratorium on the CMS plan to cite hospitals for performing point- of-care capillary blood glucose monitoring on critically ill patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2015;100:3607–3612

36. DuBois JA, Slingerland RJ, Fokkert M, et al. Bedside glucose monitoringdis it safe? A new, regulatory-compliant risk assessment evaluation protocol in critically ill patient care settings. Crit Care Med 2017;45:567–574

37. Zhang R, Isakow W, Kollef MH, Scott MG. Performance of a modern glucose meter in ICU and general hospital inpatients: 3 years of real- world paired meter and central laboratory re- sults. Crit Care Med 2017;45:1509–1514

38. Wallia A, Umpierrez GE, Rushakoff RJ, et al.; DTS Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Hos- pital Panel. Consensus statement on inpatient

use of continuous glucose monitoring. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2017;11:1036–1044
39. Umpierrez GE, Klonoff DC. Diabetes tech- nology update: use of insulin pumps and con- tinuous glucose monitoring in the hospital. Diabetes Care 2018;41:1579–1589

40. Gomez AM, Umpierrez GE. Continuous glu- cose monitoring in insulin-treated patients in non-ICU settings. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2014;8: 930–936

41. Krinsley JS, Chase JG, Gunst J, et al. Contin- uous glucose monitoring in the ICU: clinical considerations and consensus. Crit Care 2017; 21:197

42. Maynard G, Wesorick DH, O’Malley C, Inzucchi SE; Society of Hospital Medicine Glyce- mic Control Task Force. Subcutaneous insulin order sets and protocols: effective design and implementation strategies. J Hosp Med 2008; 3(Suppl.):29–41

43. Brown KE, Hertig JB. Determining current insulin pen use practices and errors in the in- patient setting. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2016; 42:568–575

44. Horne J, Bond R, Sarangarm P. Comparison of inpatient glycemic control with insulin vials versus insulin pens in general medicine patients. Hosp Pharm 2015;50:514–521

45. Veronesi G, Poerio CS, Braus A, et al. Deter- minants of nurse satisfaction using insulin pen devices with safety needles: an exploratory factor analysis. Clin Diabetes Endocrinol 2015;1:15

46. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA requires label warnings to prohibit sharing of multi-dose di- abetes pen devices among patients. Accessed 28 October 2019. Available from https://www.fda .gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm435271.htm

47. Bueno E, Benitez A, Rufinelli JV, et al. Basal- bolus regimen with insulin analogues versus human insulin in medical patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial in Latin America. Endocr Pract 2015;21:807–813

48. Umpierrez GE, Smiley D, Jacobs S, et al. Randomized study of basal-bolus insulin ther- apy in the inpatient management of patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing general sur- gery (RABBIT 2 surgery). Diabetes Care 2011;34: 256–261

49. Giugliano D, Chiodini P, Maiorino MI, Bellastella G, Esposito K. Intensification of insulin therapy with basal-bolus or premixed insulin regimens in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Endocrine 2016;51:417–428

50. Bellido V, Suarez L, Rodriguez MG, et al. Comparison of basal-bolus and premixed insulin regimens in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2015;38:2211–2216 51. Baldwin D, Zander J, Munoz C, et al. A randomized trial of two weight-based doses of insulin glargine and glulisine in hospital- ized subjects with type 2 diabetes and renal insufficiency. Diabetes Care 2012;35:1970– 1974

52. Iyengar R, Franzese J, Gianchandani R In- patient glycemic management in the setting of renal insufficiency/failure/dialysis. Curr Diab Rep 2018;18:75

53. Schmeltz LR, DeSantis AJ, Thiyagarajan V, et al. Reduction of surgical mortality and mor- bidity in diabetic patients undergoing cardiac

care.diabetesjournals.org

Diabetes Care in the Hospital S201

surgery with a combined intravenous and sub- cutaneous insulin glucose management strategy. Diabetes Care 2007;30:823–828
54. Shomali ME, Herr DL, Hill PC, Pehlivanova M, Sharretts JM, Magee MF. Conversion from in- travenous insulin to subcutaneous insulin after cardiovascular surgery: transition to target study. Diabetes Technol Ther 2011;13:121–126

55. Tripathy PR, Lansang MC. U-500 regular insulin use in hospitalized patients. Endocr Pract 2015;21:54–58
56. Lansang MC, Umpierrez GE. Inpatient hy- perglycemia management: a practical review for primary medical and surgical teams. Cleve Clin J Med 2016;83(Suppl. 1):S34–S43

57. Bally L, Thabit H, Hartnell S, et al. Closed-loop insulin delivery for glycemic control in noncritical care. N Engl J Med 2018;379:547–556
58. Boughton CK, Bally L, Martignoni F, et al. Fully closed-loop delivery in inpatients receiving nutritional support. a two-centre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2019;7:368–377

59. Pasquel FJ, Fayfman M, Umpierrez GE. De- bate on insulin vs non-insulin use in the hospital settingdis it time to revise the guidelines for the management of inpatient diabetes? Curr Diab Rep 2019;19:65

60. Fushimi N, Shibuya T, Yoshida Y, Ito S, Hachiya H, Mori A. Dulaglutide-combined basal plus correction insulin therapy contributes to ideal glycemic control in non-critical hospitalized patients. J Diabetes Investig. 5 June 2019 [Epub ahead of print]. DOI:10.1111/jdi.13093

61. Fayfman M, Galindo RJ, Rubin DJ, et al. A randomized controlled trial on the safety and efficacy of exenatide therapy for the inpatient management of general medicine and surgery patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2019;42:450–456 62.Pe ́rez-BelmonteLM,Osuna-Sa ́nchezJ, Milla ́n-Go ́mez M, et al. Glycaemic efficacy and safety of linagliptin for the management of non- cardiac surgery patients with type 2 diabetes in a real-world setting: Lina-Surg study. Ann Med 2019;51:252–261

63. Vellanki P, Rasouli N, Baldwin D, et al.; Linagliptin Inpatient Research Group. Glycaemic efficacy and safety of linagliptin compared to basal-bolus insulin regimen in patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Obes Metab. 20 November 2018 [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1111/dom.13587

64. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA adds warnings about heart failure risk to labels of type 2 di- abetes medicines containing saxagliptin and alogliptin. Accessed 28 October 2019. Avail- able from http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ ucm486096.htm

65. Akirov A, Grossman A, Shochat T, Shimon I. Mortality among hospitalized patients with hypoglycemia: insulin related and noninsulin related. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2017;102: 416–424

66. Amori RE, Pittas AG, Siegel RD, et al. Inpatient medical errors involving glucose-lowering medi- cations and their impact on patients: review of 2,598 incidents from a voluntary electronic error-reporting database. Endocr Pract 2008; 14:535–542

67. Alwan D, Chipps E, Yen P-Y, Dungan K. Evaluation of the timing and coordination of prandial insulin administration in the hospital. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2017;131:18–32

68. Hung AM, Siew ED, Wilson OD, et al. Risk of hypoglycemia following hospital discharge in patients with diabetes and acute kidney injury. Diabetes Care 2018;41:503–512

69. Maynard G, Kulasa K, Ramos P, et al. Impact of a hypoglycemia reduction bundle and a sys- tems approach to inpatient glycemic manage- ment. Endocr Pract 2015;21:355–367

70. Milligan PE, Bocox MC, Pratt E, Hoehner CM, Krettek JE, Dunagan WC. Multifaceted approach to reducing occurrence of severe hypoglycemia in a large healthcare system. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2015;72:1631–1641

71. Dagogo-Jack S. Hypoglycemia in type 1 di- abetes mellitus: pathophysiology and preven- tion. Treat Endocrinol 2004;3:91–103
72. Rickels MR. Hypoglycemia-associated auto- nomic failure, counterregulatory responses, and therapeutic options in type 1 diabetes. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 6 August 2019 [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1111/nyas.14214

73. Dendy JA, Chockalingam V, Tirumalasetty NN, et al. Identifying risk factors for severe hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients with di- abetes. Endocr Pract 2014;20:1051–1056

74. Ulmer BJ, Kara A, Mariash CN. Temporal occurrences and recurrence patterns of hypo- glycemia during hospitalization. Endocr Pract 2015;21:501–507

75. Shah BR, Walji S, Kiss A, James JE, Lowe JM. Derivation and validation of a risk-prediction tool for hypoglycemia in hospitalized adults with diabetes: the Hypoglycemia During Hospi- talization (HyDHo) score. Can J Diabetes 2019;43: 278–282.e1

76. Mathioudakis NN, Everett E, Routh S, et al. Development and validation of a prediction model for insulin-associated hypoglycemia in non-critically ill hospitalized adults. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2018;6:e000499

77. Curll M, Dinardo M, Noschese M, Korytkowski MT. Menu selection, glycaemic con- trol and satisfaction with standard and patient- controlled consistent carbohydrate meal plans in hospitalised patients with diabetes. Qual Saf Health Care 2010;19:355–359

78. Ojo O, Brooke J. Evaluation of the role of enteral nutrition in managing patients with di- abetes: a systematic review. Nutrients 2014;6: 5142–5152

79. Mabrey ME, Setji TL. Patient self-management of diabetes care in the inpatient setting: pro. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2015;9:1152–1154
80. Shah AD, Rushakoff RJ. Patient self-management of diabetes care in the inpatient setting: con. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2015;9:1155–1157

81. Houlden RL, Moore S. In-hospital manage- ment of adults using insulin pump therapy. Can J Diabetes 2014;38:126–133
82. Umpierrez GE. Basal versus sliding-scale regular insulin in hospitalized patients with hy- perglycemia during enteral nutrition therapy. Diabetes Care 2009;32:751–753

83. Pichardo-Lowden AR, Fan CY, Gabbay RA. Management of hyperglycemia in the non-intensive care patient: featuring subcu- taneous insulin protocols. Endocr Pract 2011;17: 249–260

84. Corsino L, Dhatariya K, Umpierrez G. Man- agement of diabetes and hyperglycemia in hos- pitalized patients. In Endotext. Accessed 28 October 2019. Available from http://www.ncbi .nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279093/

85. Roberts A, James J, Dhatariya K; Joint British Diabetes Societies (JBDS) for Inpatient Care. Management of hyperglycaemia and steroid (glucocorticoid) therapy: a guideline from the Joint British Diabetes Societies (JBDS) for In- patient Care group. Diabet Med 2018;35: 1011–1017

86. Kwon S, Hermayer KL, Hermayer K. Glucocorticoid- induced hyperglycemia. Am J Med Sci 2013;345: 274–277
87. Brady V, Thosani S, Zhou S, Bassett R, Busaidy NL, Lavis V. Safe and effective dosing of basal- bolus insulin in patients receiving high-dose steroids for hyper-cyclophosphamide, doxorubi- cin, vincristine, and dexamethasone chemother- apy. Diabetes Technol Ther 2014;16:874–879 88. Smiley DD, Umpierrez GE. Perioperative glucose control in the diabetic or nondiabetic patient. South Med J 2006;99:580–589

89. Buchleitner AM, Mart ́ınez-Alonso M, Herna ́ndez M, Sola` I, Mauricio D. Perioperative glycaemic control for diabetic patients under- going surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 9:CD007315

90. Demma LJ, Carlson KT, Duggan EW, Morrow JG III, Umpierrez G. Effect of basal insulin dosage on blood glucose concentration in ambulatory surgery patients with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Anesth 2017;36:184–188

91. Umpierrez GE, Smiley D, Hermayer K, et al. Randomized study comparing a basal-bolus with a basal plus correction insulin regimen for the hospital management of medical and surgical patients with type 2 diabetes: basal plus trial. Diabetes Care 2013;36:2169–2174

92. Kitabchi AE, Umpierrez GE, Miles JM, Fisher JN. Hyperglycemic crises in adult patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1335–1343 93. Vellanki P, Umpierrez GE. Diabetic ketoaci- dosis: a common debut of diabetes among African Americans with type 2 diabetes. Endocr Pract 2017;23:971–978

94. Harrison VS, Rustico S, Palladino AA, Ferrara C, Hawkes CP. Glargine co-administration with intravenous insulin in pediatric diabetic ketoa- cidosis is safe and facilitates transition to a subcutaneous regimen. Pediatr Diabetes 2017; 18:742–748

95. Hsia E, Seggelke S, Gibbs J, et al. Subcuta- neous administration of glargine to diabetic patients receiving insulin infusion prevents re- bound hyperglycemia. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012;97:3132–3137

96. Andrade-Castellanos CA, Colunga-Lozano LE, Delgado-Figueroa N, Gonzalez-Padilla DA. Sub- cutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogues for di- abetic ketoacidosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;1:CD011281

97. Kitabchi AE, Umpierrez GE, Fisher JN, Murphy MB, Stentz FB. Thirty years of personal experience in hyperglycemic crises: diabetic ke- toacidosis and hyperglycemic hyperosmolar state. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;93:1541– 1552

98. Umpierrez GE, Latif K, Stoever J, et al. Efficacy of subcutaneous insulin lispro versus continuous intravenous regular insulin for the treatment of

S202 Diabetes Care in the Hospital

Diabetes Care Volume 43, Supplement 1, January 2020

patients with diabetic ketoacidosis. Am J Med 2004;117:291–296
99. Duhon B, Attridge RL, Franco-Martinez AC, Maxwell PR, Hughes DW. Intravenous sodium bicarbonate therapy in severely acidotic diabetic ketoacidosis. Ann Pharmacother 2013;47:970–975 100. Shepperd S, Lannin NA, Clemson LM, McCluskey A, Cameron ID, Barras SL. Discharge planning from hospital to home. Cochrane Da- tabase Syst Rev 1996;1:CD000313

101. Agency for Healthcare Research and Qual- ity. Readmissions and adverse events after dis- charge. Accessed 28 October 2019. Available from https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primers/primer/11 102. Rubin DJ. Hospital readmission of patients with diabetes. Curr Diab Rep 2015;15:17

103. Gregory NS, Seley JJ, Dargar SK, Galla N, Gerber LM, Lee JI. Strategies to prevent read- mission in high-risk patients with diabetes: the

importance of an interdisciplinary approach. Curr Diab Rep 2018;18:54
104. Jiang HJ, Stryer D, Friedman B, Andrews R. Multiple hospitalizations for patients with di- abetes. Diabetes Care 2003;26:1421–1426 105. Maldonado MR, D’Amico S, Rodriguez L, Iyer D, Balasubramanyam A. Improved outcomes in indigent patients with ketosis-prone diabetes: effect of a dedicated diabetes treatment unit. Endocr Pract 2003;9:26–32

106. Wu EQ, Zhou S, Yu A, et al. Outcomes associated with post-discharge insulin continuity in US patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiating insulin in the hospital. Hosp Pract (1995) 2012;40:40–48

107. Hirschman KB, Bixby MB. Transitions in care from the hospital to home for patients with diabetes. Diabetes Spectr 2014;27:192–195 108. Tuttle KR, Bakris GL, Bilous RW, et al. Di- abetic kidney disease: a report from an ADA

Consensus Conference. Diabetes Care 2014;37: 2864–2883
109. Rubin DJ, Recco D, Turchin A, Zhao H, Golden SH. External validation of the Diabetes Early Re-admission Risk Indicator (DERRI!). En- docr Pract 2018;24:527–541

110. Bansal N, Dhaliwal R, Weinstock RS. Man- agement of diabetes in the elderly. Med Clin North Am 2015;99:351–377
111. Pasquel FJ, Powell W, Peng L, et al. A ran- domized controlled trial comparing treatment with oral agents and basal insulin in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes in long-term care facilities. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2015;3:e000104

112. Lipska KJ, Ross JS, Miao Y, Shah ND, Lee SJ, Steinman MA. Potential overtreatment of di- abetes mellitus in older adults with tight gly- cemic control. JAMA Intern Med 2015;175:356– 362

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: