Comparative Outcomes of Empagliflozin to Dapagliflozin in Patients With Heart Failure.

Importance: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been shown to have benefits when used in patients with heart failure. The comparative outcomes of SGLT2 inhibitors relative to each other has not been well defined and may impact medication selection. Objective: To determine the comparative outcomes of empagliflozin and dapagliflozin on reducing the composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalizations in patients with heart failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included patients with heart failure from August 18, 2021, and December 6, 2022, in the TriNetX Research Collaborative, a centralized database of deidentified electronic medical record data from a network of 81 health care organizations. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of heart failure, had never received an SGLT2 inhibitor previously, and were newly started on empagliflozin or dapagliflozin. Patients were followed up for 1 year. Exposure: Initiation of dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the time to the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization between study days 1 to 365. Kaplan-Meier analyses, hazard ratios (HRs), and 95% CIs were used to assess the primary outcome. Results: Among 744 914 eligible patients, 28 075 began empagliflozin (15 976 [56.9%]) or dapagliflozin (12 099 [43.1%]). After nearest-neighbor matching for demographics, diagnoses, and medication use, there were 11 077 patients in each group. Of patients who received empagliflozin, 9247 (57.9%) were male, 3130 (19.6%) were Black individuals, and 9576 (59.9%) were White individuals. Similarly, of those who received dapagliflozin, 7439 (61.5%) were male, 2445 (20.2%) were Black individuals, and 7131 (58.9%) were White individuals. Patients receiving empagliflozin were less likely to experience the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization compared with those initiated on dapagliflozin (3545 [32.2%] vs 3828 [34.8%] events; HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.86-0.94]) in the year following SGLT2 inhibitor initiation and less likely to be hospitalized (HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.86-0.94]). All-cause mortality did not differ between exposure groups (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.00]). There was no difference in mean hemoglobin A1c or adverse events between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, patients who initiated empagliflozin were less likely to experience the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization compared with patients who started dapagliflozin. Additional studies are needed to confirm these finding.

Comparison of Propylthiouracil vs Methimazole for Thyroid Storm in Critically Ill Patients.

Importance: Thyroid storm is the most severe form of thyrotoxicosis, with high mortality, and is treated with propylthiouracil and methimazole. Some guidelines recommend propylthiouracil over methimazole, although the difference in outcomes associated with each treatment is unclear. Objective: To compare outcomes associated with use of propylthiouracil vs methimazole for the treatment of thyroid storm. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study comprised a large, multicenter, US-based cohort from the Premier Healthcare Database between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020. It included 1383 adult patients admitted to intensive or intermediate care units with a diagnosis of thyroid storm per International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes and treated with either propylthiouracil or methimazole. Analyses were conducted from July 2022 to February 2023. Exposure: Patients received either propylthiouracil or methimazole for treatment of thyroid storm. Exposure was assigned based on the initial thionamide administered. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the adjusted risk difference of in-hospital death or discharge to hospice between patients treated with propylthiouracil and those treated with methimazole, assessed by targeted maximum likelihood estimation. Results: A total of 1383 patients (656 [47.4%] treated with propylthiouracil; mean [SD] age, 45 [16] years; 473 women [72.1%]; and 727 [52.6%] treated with methimazole; mean [SD] age, 45 [16] years; 520 women [71.5%]) were included in the study. The standardized mean difference for age was 0.056, and the standardized mean difference for sex was 0.013. The primary composite outcome occurred in 7.4% of of patients (102 of 1383; 95% CI, 6.0%-8.8%). A total of 8.5% (56 of 656; 95% CI, 6.4%-10.7%) of patients who initiated propylthiouracil and 6.3% (46 of 727; 95% CI, 4.6%-8.1%) who initiated methimazole died in the hospital (adjusted risk difference, 0.6% [95% CI, -1.8% to 3.0%]; P = .64). There were no significant differences in duration of organ support, total hospitalization costs, or rates of adverse events between the 2 treatment groups. Conclusion and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study of a multicenter cohort of adult patients with thyroid storm, no significant differences were found in mortality or adverse events in patients who were treated with propylthiouracil or methimazole. Thus, current guidelines recommending propylthiouracil over methimazole for treatment of thyroid storm may merit reevaluation.

An Opportunity for Improvement: Evaluation of Diabetes Technology Education Among Adult Endocrinology Training Programs.

BACKGROUND: Despite increases in continuous glucose monitor (CGM) and insulin pump use in adults with diabetes, there is room for expansion. Technology adoption may be influenced by the training environment and fellowship education. However, little is known about adult endocrinology trainee comfort with, understanding of, or methods by which trainees receive education about diabetes technology. METHODS: Mixed methods, sequential explanatory evaluation using survey and semi-structured interviews of endocrinology trainees and fellowship leadership in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited adult endocrinology fellowship programs to assess trainee and leadership comfort with, perceived knowledge of, and current methods for diabetes technology education. RESULTS: Seventy-seven respondents completed the survey. The majority of training programs have curricula for training on insulin pumps (74%) and CGM (75.3%); 52% of fellows felt curricula are adequate. First- and second-year fellows were more comfortable with CGM than insulin pump use. Only half of third-year fellows felt comfortable with starting insulin pump therapy or recommending insulin dose adjustments based on CGM rate of change arrows. Qualitative interviews identified the importance of both direct instruction and experiential learning in diabetes technology education. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of trainees feel that curricula for learning to use and manage insulin pumps and CGM are inadequate and feel uncomfortable with critical aspects of technology use, demonstrating the need for increased attention to trainee education in the use of diabetes technology. Based on a better understanding of current and preferred methods for instruction, this study provides direction for future development of initiatives to improve fellow education in this field.

Smartphone-Guided Self-prone Positioning vs Usual Care in Nonintubated Hospital Ward Patients With COVID-19: A Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Safe, effective, and easily implementable treatments that reduce the progression of respiratory failure in COVID-19 are urgently needed. Despite the increased adoption of prone positioning during the pandemic, the effectiveness of this technique on progression of respiratory failure among nonintubated patients is unclear. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the effectiveness of smartphone-guided self-prone positioning recommendations and instructions compared with usual care in reducing progression of respiratory failure among nonintubated patients with COVID-19? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Awake Prone Position for Early Hypoxemia in COVID-19 (APPEX-19) is a multicenter randomized clinical trial that randomized nonintubated adults with COVID-19 on < 6 L/min of supplemental oxygen to receive a smartphone-guided self-prone positioning intervention or usual care. The primary outcome was the composite of respiratory deterioration (an increase in supplemental oxygen requirement) or ICU transfer. Using a Bayesian statistical approach, the posterior probability of superiority within each treatment arm (superiority threshold 95%) was calculated. RESULTS: The trial was stopped early for slow enrollment. A total of 293 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (159 self-prone positioning intervention and 134 usual care). Among participants who self-reported body positioning (n = 139 [70 intervention, 69 usual care]), 71.4% in the intervention arm and 59.4% in the usual care arm attempted prone positioning. Thirty-one participants (posterior mean, 24.7%; 95% credible interval, 18.6-31.4) receiving usual care and 32 participants (posterior mean, 22.1%; 95% credible interval, 16.6-28.1) receiving the self-prone positioning intervention experienced the primary outcome; the posterior probability of superiority for the self-prone positioning intervention was 72.1%, less than the 95% threshold for superiority. Adverse events occurred in 26.9% of participants in the usual care arm and in 11.9% of participants in the intervention arm. INTERPRETATION: Among nonintubated patients with COVID-19, smartphone-guided self-prone positioning recommendations and instructions did not promote strong adherence to prone positioning. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04344587; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Delays in Continuous Glucose Monitoring Device Initiation: A Single Center Experience and a Call to Change.

Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been increasingly shown to be beneficial in patients with both types 1 and 2 diabetes using insulin. Despite this, challenges remain in obtaining coverage for these devices. We sought to define the process of initiation of CGM and better understand factors associated with successful initiation. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study of 271 patients seen over a 3-year period from 2017 to 2020 in the adult endocrinology clinic at Boston Medical Center who were prescribed CGM was performed. The primary outcome was time to CGM initiation. Secondary outcomes included factors associated with initiation and continued use of CGMs and glycemic control. Results: Obtaining CGM through pharmacy benefit was significantly faster than through durable medical equipment companies (78 days vs. 152 days, P < 0.0001). Factors associated with initiation of CGM were younger age, private insurance, and education with a clinical diabetes educator. Identifying as black or Hispanic was significantly associated with decreased initiation of CGM. Glycemic control as represented by hemoglobin A1c improved in patients initiated on CGM from 9.06% to 8.22% (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Prescribing CGM as a pharmacy benefit significantly reduces the time to initiation, but on average, still takes several months, delaying potentially life-saving care for patients living with diabetes. Barriers to CGM initiation must be addressed to ensure timely delivery of optimal care to our patients.

A quality improvement initiative to successfully reduce the frequency of hypoglycemia during treatment of hyperglycemic crises at an academic safety-net hospital: Insights and results.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state (HHS) are potentially life-threatening complications of diabetes. Many hospitals have developed protocols to guide the management of these conditions and align with best practices. One of the main complications encountered in the treatment of hyperglycemic crises is hypoglycemia. METHODS: At our institution, we undertook a review of our insulin infusion titration protocol, rates of hypoglycemia, and time to clinical resolution for patients with hyperglycemic crises. A multidisciplinary team performed a literature review and analyzed baseline hospital data with the existing protocol. With the input of multiple stakeholders, several changes were made to the titration algorithm over multiple PDSA cycles to refine the protocol. Effectiveness and safety of the protocol, as well as fidelity with the protocol, were assessed after each PDSA cycle. RESULTS: After the initial cycle, chart review showed a reduction in hypoglycemia rates of more than 50% in patients treated with the new protocol without any increase in time to resolution of DKA. A second version of the protocol was implemented to improve usability, and improvement in hypoglycemia was maintained. CONCLUSION: Despite the fact that the initial protocol had been developed based on best practice recommendations, rates of hypoglycemia were initially high. Critical assessment of pitfalls in management allowed changes to the protocol that significantly and sustainably reduced hypoglycemia.

Insulin Requirements in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Undergoing Bariatric Surgery in the Inpatient Setting and Upon Discharge: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of Insulin Management Strategies.

OBJECTIVE: Rapid improvement in blood glucose (BG) after weight-loss surgery (WLS) can make postoperative glucose management challenging in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Our study examined the safety and efficacy of insulin management strategies during hospitalization and after discharge following WLS. METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study included 160 adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus undergoing WLS. Patients with glycated hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) level <7% (53 mmol/mol) and not on antihyperglycemic medications or metformin monotherapy were excluded. BG and insulin dosing during hospitalization and at 2-week follow-up, and impact of preoperative HbA1C level were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean age was 46.3 years. Median preoperative HbA1C level was 8% (64 mmol/mol). Postoperatively, most patients received basal insulin plus sliding-scale insulin (SSI; 79/160, 49%) or SSI alone (77/160, 48%). The initial postoperative basal dose was 0.23 units/kg/day. The median basal insulin dose at discharge was 61% lower than preoperative dose. At 2-week follow-up, 34 of 44 patients (77%) had BG levels between 70-200 mg/dL and 1 of 44 (2.2%) had BG levels >200 mg/dL, with no hypoglycemia. Patients with HbA1C level >9% (75 mmol/mol) had higher BG on admission and during hospitalization, required higher insulin doses while hospitalized, and were more frequently discharged on insulin. CONCLUSION: SSI is effective in managing BG in some patients immediately after WLS. However, about half of the patients may require basal insulin at doses similar to those required by other inpatients. Preoperative hyperglycemia may affect inpatient insulin needs and BG. Low-dose basal insulin appears safe and effective upon discharge for select patients.

Rationale and Design of the Awake Prone Position for Early Hypoxemia in COVID-19 Study Protocol: A Clinical Trial.

The unprecedented public health burdens of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have intensified the urgency of identifying effective, low-cost treatments that limit the need for advanced life support measures and improve clinical outcomes. However, personal protective equipment and staffing shortages, disease virulence, and infectivity have created significant barriers to traditional clinical trial practices. We present the novel design of a pragmatic, adaptive, multicenter, international, prospective randomized controlled clinical trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of awake prone positioning in spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19 (APPEX-19 [Awake Prone Position for Early Hypoxemia in COVID-19]). Key innovations of this trial include 1) a novel smartphone-based communication process that facilitates rapid enrollment and intervention delivery while allowing social distancing and conservation of personal protective equipment, 2) Bayesian response-adaptive randomization to allow preferential assignment to the most effective intervention and expedite trial completion compared with frequentist designs, 3) remote electronic collection of patient-reported outcomes and electronic medical record data, and 4) pragmatic prospective use of patient-reported data and data collected as part of routine clinical care. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04344587).

Guideline-Concordant Insulin Infusion Initiation Among Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to benchmark rates of guideline-concordant insulin infusion initiation, identify factors associated with guideline-concordant insulin practices, and examine the association between hospital-level guideline concordance and mortality among critically ill patients with sepsis. METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study of intensive care patients with sepsis who were eligible for insulin infusion initiation according to American Diabetes Association and Surviving Sepsis guidelines (persistent blood sugar ≥180 mg/dL). We then identified patients who were initiated on insulin infusions within 24 hours of eligibility. We examined patient- and hospital-level factors associated with guideline-concordant insulin infusion initiation and explored the association between the hospital-level proportion of patients who received guideline-concordant insulin infusions and hospital mortality. RESULTS: Among 5453 guideline-eligible patients with sepsis, 13.4% were initiated on insulin infusions. Factors most strongly associated with guideline-concordant insulin infusion initiation were mechanical ventilation and hospital of admission. The hospital-level proportion of patients who received guideline-concordant insulin infusions were not associated with mortality. Among 1501 intensive care unit patients with sepsis who were started on insulin infusions, 37.0% were initiated at a blood glucose level below 180 mg/dL, the guideline-recommended starting threshold. CONCLUSION: Guideline-concordant insulin infusion initiation was uncommon among patients with sepsis admitted to U.S. intensive care units and was determined in large part by hospital of admission. The degree to which hospitals were guideline-concordant were not associated with mortality.

REDUCED IMPACT OF DIABETES CLINIC REFERRAL ON HIGH-FREQUENCY EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT USERS.

OBJECTIVE: The patterns of emergency department (ED) visits in patients with diabetes are not well understood. The Emergency Department Diabetes Rapid-referral Program (EDRP) allows direct booking of ED patients presenting with urgent diabetes needs into a diabetes specialty clinic within 1 day of ED discharge. The objective of this secondary analysis was to examine characteristics of patients with diabetes who have frequent ED visits and determine reasons for revisits. METHODS: A single-center analysis was conducted comparing patients referred to the EDRP (n = 420) to historical unexposed controls (n = 791). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each frequency group of ED revisits (none, 1 to 3 [infrequent], 4 to 10 [frequent], or >10 [superfrequent]) in the year after the ED index visit. Secondary outcomes were hospitalization rates and International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnoses at ED revisits. RESULTS: Superfrequent users, responsible for >20% of total ED visits, made up small but not significantly different proportions of EDRP and control populations, 3.6% and 5.2%, respectively. Superfrequent groups had lower hospital admission rates at ED revisits compared to frequent groups. Mental health disorders (including substance abuse) were the primary, secondary, or tertiary ICD-9 codes in 30.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27.7% to 33.5%) and 6.6% (95% CI, 5.1% to 8.2%) in the superfrequent and infrequent groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Direct access to diabetes specialty care from the ED is effective in reducing ED recidivism but not amongst a small subgroup of superfrequent ED users. This group was more likely to have mental health disorders recorded at ED revisits, suggesting that more comprehensive approaches are needed for this population. ABBREVIATIONS: EDRP = Emergency Department Diabetes Rapid-referral Program; ED = emergency department; HbA1c = hemoglobin A1c; ICD-9 = International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision.

Rethinking the Endpoints of mHealth Intervention Research in Diabetes Care.

Mobile health (mHealth) is an emerging branch of medicine that utilizes technology to impact health care. With increasing access to smartphones and mobile devices, there has been an increase in both the availability and use of mHealth resources, including the use of text messages, apps, and web portals. In diabetes, there is particular interest as technology has long been a mainstay of management through glucometers, insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors, which are increasingly interconnected. Although there is high demand for mHealth interventions in diabetes, there is no clear consensus on the best way to monitor these interventions. While randomized controlled trials are considered the gold standard for most medical research, we propose that alternative trial designs may be more applicable in the ever-changing mHealth landscape.

Active cocaine use does not increase the likelihood of hyperglycemic crisis.

OBJECTIVE: Hyperglycemic crisis encompasses a group of diabetes emergencies characterized by insulin deficiency with high morbidity and mortality. Cocaine use is increasingly prevalent in the United States and may be associated with increased risk of diabetic ketoacidosis. The objective was to determine if active cocaine use at hospital admission could be considered a risk factor for development of hyperglycemic crisis. METHODS: A retrospective case-control analysis was performed on 950 inpatients with hyperglycemia at an urban academic hospital. Patients admitted with non-emergent hyperglycemia were compared to patients who met criteria for diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state (HHS), and hyperosmolar ketoacidosis (HK), based on the absence or presence of cocaine metabolites on urine toxicology screen. Outcomes included frequency of cocaine use in patients with DKA, HHS, HK, and non-emergent hyperglycemia; phenotypic characteristics of cocaine users vs. non-users with hyperglycemia; phenotypic characteristics of patients with hyperglycemic crisis vs. non-emergent hyperglycemia. RESULTS: 950 patients were admitted with hyperglycemia, 133 of which met criteria for hyperglycemic crisis. There was no significant difference in the frequency of cocaine use in individuals with non-emergent hyperglycemia compared to individuals with hyperglycemic crisis (16.9% vs. 17.2%, p = 0.90). 16.9% of patients with DKA, 16.4% of patients with HHS, and 6.4% of patients with HK were cocaine users. CONCLUSIONS: We found no association between active cocaine use at the time of hospital admission and development of hyperglycemic crisis, when compared to non-emergent hyperglycemia. The role of routine screening for cocaine use in patients with hyperglycemic crisis is unclear.

OPEN ACCESS TO DIABETES CENTER FROM THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT REDUCES HOSPITALIZATIONS IN THE SUSEQUENT YEAR.

OBJECTIVE: Patients who present to the emergency department (ED) for diabetes without hyperglycemic crisis are at risk of unnecessary hospitalizations and poor outcomes. To address this, the ED Diabetes Rapid-referral Program (EDRP) was designed to provide ED staff with direct booking into the diabetes center. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of the EDRP on hospitalization rate, ED utilization rate, glycemic control, and expenditures. METHODS: We conducted a single-center analysis of the EDRP cohort (n = 420) and compared 1-year outcomes to historic controls (n = 791). We also compared EDRP patients who arrived (ARR) to those who did not show (NS). The primary outcome was hospitalization rate over 1 year. Secondary outcomes included ED recidivism rate, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and healthcare expenditures. RESULTS: Compared with controls, the EDRP cohort was less likely to be hospitalized (27.1% vs. 41.5%, P<.001) or return to the ED (52.2% vs. 62.3%, P = .001) at the end of 1 year. Total hospitalizations were also lower in the EDRP (157 ± 19 vs. 267 ± 18 per 1,000 persons per year, P<.001). The EDRP cohort had a greater reduction in HbA1c (-2.66 vs. -2.01%, P<.001), which was more pronounced when ARR patients were compared with NS (-2.71% vs. -1.37%, P<.05). The mean per patient institutional healthcare expenditures were lower by $5,461 compared with controls. CONCLUSION: Eliminating barriers to scheduling diabetes-focused ambulatory care for ED patients was associated with significant reductions in hospitalization rate, ED recidivism rate, HbA1c, and healthcare expenditures in the subsequent year. ABBREVIATIONS: ARR = arrived ED = emergency department EDRP = emergency department diabetes rapid-referral Program HbA1c = hemoglobin A1c NS = no show.