Perioperative Identification and Management of Hyperglycemia in Orthopaedic Surgery.

➤: The consequences of undermanaged perioperative hyperglycemia are notable and can have a serious impact on adverse postoperative outcomes, especially surgical site infections and periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). ➤: Preoperative screening of hemoglobin A1c with a goal threshold of <7.45% is ideal. ➤: There are a variety of risk factors that contribute to hyperglycemia that should be considered in the perioperative period, including glucocorticoid use, nutritional factors, patient-specific factors, anesthesia, and surgery. ➤: There are expected trends in the rise, peak, and fall of postoperative blood glucose levels, and identifying and treating hyperglycemia as swiftly as possible are the fundamental aims of treatment and improved glucose control. Performing frequent postoperative blood glucose monitoring (in the post-anesthesia care unit, on the day of surgery at 1700 and 2100 hours, and in the morning of postoperative day 1) should be considered to allow for the early detection of alterations in glucose metabolism. In addition, instituting a postoperative dietary restriction of carbohydrates should be considered. ➤: The use of insulin as a hypoglycemic agent in orthopaedic patients is relatively safe and is an effective means of controlling fluctuating blood glucose levels. Insulin therapy should be administered to treat hyperglycemia at ≥140 mg/dL when fasting and ≥180 mg/dL postprandially. Insulin therapy should be ceased at blood glucose levels of <110 mg/dL; however, monitoring for glycemic dysregulation should be continued. In all cases of complex diabetes, consultation with diabetes specialty services should be considered. ➤: The emerging use of technology, including continuous subcutaneous insulin pump therapy and continuous glucose monitoring, is an exciting area of further research and development as such technology can more immediately detect and correct aberrations in blood glucose levels.

Postoperative Hyperglycemia Can Be Safely and Effectively Controlled in Both Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients with Use of a Subcutaneous Insulin Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative hyperglycemia related to stress has been shown to be an independent risk factor for periprosthetic joint infection. In a non-intensive care, general-surgery setting, a standardized postoperative insulin protocol has been shown to decrease the rate of wound infections. We hypothesized that the use of a similar protocol is both safe and effective for controlling hyperglycemia in patients who have undergone total joint replacement. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 489 consecutive patients who underwent primary or revision total hip or knee arthroplasty between January 2008 and April 2013. All patients were tested with point-of-care (finger-stick) glucose determinations postoperatively and were started on a subcutaneous insulin protocol if they had postoperative stress hyperglycemia of >140 mg/dL when fasting or >180 mg/dL after meals. Insulin was discontinued when blood glucose decreased to <100 mg/dL. RESULTS: Of the 489 patients, 301 (62%) qualified for the insulin protocol. Thirty-seven (17%) of the 220 patients for whom the hemoglobin A1c level was available were diabetic, and 21 (11%) of the 187 patients for whom body mass index data were available were morbidly obese (body mass index, ≥40 kg/m2). Diabetes (p < 0.001), revision surgery (p < 0.001), male sex (p = 0.0110), and obesity (including morbid obesity) (p = 0.0051) were independent factors resulting in significant glycemic elevation. A trend toward hyperglycemia occurred in younger patients but did not reach significance (p = 0.063). The glucose levels of patients in all of these groups responded well to insulin. None of the patients who were managed with the insulin experienced a periprosthetic joint infection. There were no injuries related to hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the present study suggest that hyperglycemia is a common link between seemingly disparate factors related to the increased prevalence of periprosthetic joint infection. The standardized subcutaneous insulin protocol was both safe and effective for the treatment of hyperglycemia for nondiabetic as well as diabetic patients. Patients who have undergone total joint replacement, especially those with revision procedures, male sex, morbid obesity, and diabetes, should be evaluated for hyperglycemia starting in the post-anesthesia care unit and should be managed with the insulin protocol when that risk is identified. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Experience with an anonymous web-based state EMS safety incident reporting system.

BACKGROUND: Patient and provider safety is paramount in all aspects of emergency medical services (EMS) systems. The leaders, administrators, and policymakers of these systems must have an understanding of situations that present potential for harm to patients or providers. OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed reports to a statewide EMS safety event reporting system with the purpose of categorizing the types of incidents reported and identifying opportunities to prevent future safety events. METHODS: This statewide EMS safety incident reporting system is a Web-based system to which any individual can anonymously report any event or situation perceived to impact safety. We reviewed all reports between the system's inception in 2003 through August 2010. A stipulation of the system is that any entry containing information that identifies an EMS provider, agency, or patient will be deleted and thus not included in the analysis. Each event report included the description of the event, the relationship of the reporter, and the year in which the event occurred. Each entry was placed into a category that best represents the situation described. RESULTS: A total of 415 reports were received during the study period, and 186 reports were excluded-163 (39%) excluded by the state because of identifiable information and 23 (6%) excluded by the authors because of nonsensical description. Within the remaining 229 reports, there were 237 distinct safety events. These events were classified as actions/behavior (32%), vehicle/transportation (16%), staffing or ambulance availability (13%), communications (8%), medical equipment (9%), multiple patients/agencies/units and level-of-care issues (7%), medical procedure (6%), medication (5%), accident scene management/scene safety (3%), and protocol issues (1%). EMS providers directly involved in the event represented the largest reporting group (33%). We also provide examples of statewide system and policy changes that were made in direct response to these reports. CONCLUSION: This EMS safety incident reporting system identified situations that occurred in many categories of EMS care. These potential dangers represent opportunity to assess, and ultimately change, policy and procedures to reduce potential safety events and medical errors and improve overall safety. A substantial number of cases were excluded to maintain the promise of anonymity within the system.