Empiric radioiodine for hyperthyroidism: Outcomes, prescribing patterns, and its place in the modern era of theranostics.

BACKGROUND: The modern era of radioiodine (I-131) theranostics for metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer requires us to rationalize the role of traditional empiric prescription in nonmalignant thyroid disease. We currently practice empiric I-131 prescription for treatment of hyperthyroidism. This study aims to assess outcomes after treatment of hyperthyroidism by empiric I-131 prescription at our centre, evaluate factors that impact on outcomes and prescribing practice, and gain insight into whether there is a place for theranostically-guided prescription in hyperthyroidism. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of all patients with Graves' disease, toxic multinodular goitre (MNG) and toxic adenoma treated with I-131 between 2016 and 2021. Associations between clinical or scintigraphic variables and remission (euthyroid or hypothyroid) or persistence of hyperthyroidism at follow-up were performed using standard t test as well as Pearson's product correlation. RESULTS: Of 146 patients with a mean follow-up of 13.6 months, 80.8% achieved remission of hyperthyroidism. This was highest in toxic nodules (90.1%), compared with Graves' disease (73.8%) and toxic MNG (75.5%). In patients with Graves' disease, higher administered activity was associated with remission (p = .035). There was a weak inverse correlation between the Tc-99m pertechnetate uptake vs prescribed activity in Graves' disease (r = -0.33; p = .009). Only one patient (0.7%) had an I-131 induced flare of thyrotoxicosis. CONCLUSION: Traditional empiric I-131 prescription is a safe and effective treatment of hyperthyroidism and suitable for most patients. However, there may be a role for personalized I-131 prescription by theranostic guidance in selected patients with high thyroid hyperactivity.

Clinical Prediction Tool To Identify Adults With Type 2 Diabetes at Risk for Persistent Adverse Glycemia in Hospital.

OBJECTIVES: Given the high incidence of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia in hospital and the lack of prediction tools for this problem, we developed a clinical tool to assist early identification of individuals at risk for persistent adverse glycemia (AG) in hospital. METHODS: We analyzed a cohort of 594 consecutive adult inpatients with type 2 diabetes. We identified clinical factors available early in the admission course that were associated with persistent AG (defined as ≥2 days with capillary glucose <4 or >15 mmol/L during admission). A prediction model for persistent AG was constructed using logistic regression and internal validation was performed using a split-sample approach. RESULTS: Persistent AG occurred in 153 (26%) of inpatients, and was associated with admission dysglycemia (odds ratio [OR], 3.65), glycated hemoglobin ≥8.1% (OR, 5.08), glucose-lowering treatment regimen containing sulfonylurea (OR, 3.50) or insulin (OR, 4.22), glucocorticoid medication treatment (OR, 2.27), Charlson Comorbidity Index score and the number of observed days. An early-identification prediction tool, based on clinical factors reliably available at admission (admission dysglycemia, glycated hemoglobin, glucose-lowering regimen and glucocorticoid treatment), could accurately predict persistent AG (receiver-operating characteristic area under curve = 0.806), and, at the optimal cutoff, the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value were 84%, 66% and 53%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A clinical prediction tool based on clinical risk factors available at admission to hospital identified patients at increased risk for persistent AG and could assist early targeted management by inpatient diabetes teams.

Glucometric benchmarking in an Australian hospital enabled by networked glucose meter technology.

OBJECTIVE: To assess glucometric outcomes and to estimate the incidence of hypo- and hyperglycaemia among non-critical care inpatients in a major Australian hospital. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective 10-week observational study (7 March - 22 May 2016) of consecutive inpatients with diabetes or newly detected hyperglycaemia admitted to eight medical and surgical wards at the Royal Melbourne Hospital. Point-of-care blood glucose (BG) data were collected with networked glucose meters. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Glycaemic control, as assessed with three glucometric models (by population, by patient, by patient-day); incidence of adverse glycaemic days (AGDs; patient-days with BG levels below 4 mmol/L or above 15 mmol/L). RESULTS: During the study period, there were 465 consecutive admissions of 441 patients with diabetes or newly detected hyperglycaemia, and 9817 BG measurements over 2953 patient-days. The mean patient-day BG level was 9.5 mmol/L (SD, 3.3 mmol/L). The incidence of hyperglycaemia was higher than for a United States hospital benchmark (patient-days with mean BG level above 10 mmol/L, 37% v 32), and that of hypoglycaemia lower (proportion of patient-days with mean BG level below 3.9 mmol/L, 4.1% v 6.1%). There were 260 (95% CI, 245-277) AGDs per 1000 patient-days; the incidence was higher in medical than surgical ward patients (290 [CI, 270-310] v 206 [CI, 181-230] per 1000 patient-days). 604 AGDs (79%) were linked with 116 patients (25%). Episodes of hyperglycaemia (BG above 15 mmol/L) were more frequent before lunch, dinner, and bedtime; 94 of 187 episodes of hypoglycaemia (BG below 4 mmol/L) occurred between 11 pm and 8 am. DISCUSSION: Glucometric analysis supported by networked glucose meter technology provides detailed inpatient data that could enable local benchmarking for promoting safe diabetes care in Australian hospitals.

Early Intervention for Diabetes in Medical and Surgical Inpatients Decreases Hyperglycemia and Hospital-Acquired Infections: A Cluster Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if early electronic identification and bedside management of inpatients with diabetes improves glycemic control in noncritical care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We investigated a proactive or early intervention model of care (whereby an inpatient diabetes team electronically identified individuals with diabetes and aimed to provide bedside management within 24 h of admission) compared with usual care (a referral-based consultation service). We conducted a cluster randomized trial on eight wards, consisting of a 10-week baseline period (all clusters received usual care) followed by a 12-week active period (clusters randomized to early intervention or usual care). Outcomes were adverse glycemic days (AGDs) (patient-days with glucose <4 or >15 mmol/L [<72 or >270 mg/dL]) and adverse patient outcomes. RESULTS: We included 1,002 consecutive adult inpatients with diabetes or new hyperglycemia. More patients received specialist diabetes management (92% vs. 15%, P < 0.001) and new insulin treatment (57% vs. 34%, P = 0.001) with early intervention. At the cluster level, incidence of AGDs decreased by 24% from 243 to 186 per 1,000 patient-days in the intervention arm (P < 0.001), with no change in the control arm. At the individual level, adjusted number of AGDs per person decreased from a mean 1.4 (SD 1.6) to 1.0 (0.9) days (-28% change [95% CI -45 to -11], P = 0.001) in the intervention arm but did not change in the control arm (1.8 [2.0] to 1.5 [1.8], -9% change [-25 to 6], P = 0.23). Early intervention reduced overt hyperglycemia (55% decrease in patient-days with mean glucose >15 mmol/L, P < 0.001) and hospital-acquired infections (odds ratio 0.20 [95% CI 0.07-0.58], P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Early identification and management of inpatients with diabetes decreased hyperglycemia and hospital-acquired infections.

Diabetic Foot Australia guideline on footwear for people with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper was to create an updated Australian guideline on footwear for people with diabetes. METHODS: We reviewed new footwear publications, (inter)national guidelines, and consensus expert opinion alongside the 2013 Australian footwear guideline to formulate updated recommendations. RESULT: We recommend health professionals managing people with diabetes should: (1) Advise people with diabetes to wear footwear that fits, protects and accommodates the shape of their feet. (2) Advise people with diabetes to always wear socks within their footwear, in order to reduce shear and friction. (3) Educate people with diabetes, their relatives and caregivers on the importance of wearing appropriate footwear to prevent foot ulceration. (4) Instruct people with diabetes at intermediate- or high-risk of foot ulceration to obtain footwear from an appropriately trained professional to ensure it fits, protects and accommodates the shape of their feet. (5) Motivate people with diabetes at intermediate- or high-risk of foot ulceration to wear their footwear at all times, both indoors and outdoors. (6) Motivate people with diabetes at intermediate- or high-risk of foot ulceration (or their relatives and caregivers) to check their footwear, each time before wearing, to ensure that there are no foreign objects in, or penetrating, the footwear; and check their feet, each time their footwear is removed, to ensure there are no signs of abnormal pressure, trauma or ulceration. (7) For people with a foot deformity or pre-ulcerative lesion, consider prescribing medical grade footwear, which may include custom-made in-shoe orthoses or insoles. (8) For people with a healed plantar foot ulcer, prescribe medical grade footwear with custom-made in-shoe orthoses or insoles with a demonstrated plantar pressure relieving effect at high-risk areas. (9) Review prescribed footwear every three months to ensure it still fits adequately, protects, and supports the foot. (10) For people with a plantar diabetic foot ulcer, footwear is not specifically recommended for treatment; prescribe appropriate offloading devices to heal these ulcers. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline contains 10 key recommendations to guide health professionals in selecting the most appropriate footwear to meet the specific foot risk needs of an individual with diabetes.

Australian Diabetes Foot Network: practical guideline on the provision of footwear for people with diabetes.

Trauma, in the form of pressure and/or friction from footwear, is a common cause of foot ulceration in people with diabetes. These practical recommendations regarding the provision of footwear for people with diabetes were agreed upon following review of existing position statements and clinical guidelines. The aim of this process was not to re-invent existing guidelines but to provide practical guidance for health professionals on how they can best deliver these recommendations within the Australian health system. Where information was lacking or inconsistent, a consensus was reached following discussion by all authors. Appropriately prescribed footwear, used alone or in conjunction with custom-made foot orthoses, can reduce pedal pressures and reduce the risk of foot ulceration. It is important for all health professionals involved in the care of people with diabetes to both assess and make recommendations on the footwear needs of their clients or to refer to health professionals with such skills and knowledge. Individuals with more complex footwear needs (for example those who require custom-made medical grade footwear and orthoses) should be referred to health professionals with experience in the prescription of these modalities and who are able to provide appropriate and timely follow-up. Where financial disadvantage is a barrier to individuals acquiring appropriate footwear, health care professionals should be aware of state and territory based equipment funding schemes that can provide financial assistance. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and people living in rural and remote areas are likely to have limited access to a broad range of footwear. Provision of appropriate footwear to people with diabetes in these communities needs be addressed as part of a comprehensive national strategy to reduce the burden of diabetes and its complications on the health system.

Australian Diabetes Foot Network: management of diabetes-related foot ulceration - a clinical update.

Appropriate assessment and management of diabetes-related foot ulcers (DRFUs) is essential to reduce amputation risk. Management requires debridement, wound dressing, pressure off-loading, good glycaemic control and potentially antibiotic therapy and vascular intervention. As a minimum, all DRFUs should be managed by a doctor and a podiatrist and/or wound care nurse. Health professionals unable to provide appropriate care for people with DRFUs should promptly refer individuals to professionals with the requisite knowledge and skills. Indicators for immediate referral to an emergency department or multidisciplinary foot care team (MFCT) include gangrene, limb-threatening ischaemia, deep ulcers (bone, joint or tendon in the wound base), ascending cellulitis, systemic symptoms of infection and abscesses. Referral to an MFCT should occur if there is lack of wound progress after 4 weeks of appropriate treatment.