Improving glycemic control in medical inpatients: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient hyperglycemia is associated with poor patient outcomes. Current guidelines recommend that in an inpatient non-ICU setting there be treatment to achieve a glucose level below 180 mg/dL. METHODS: Objectives of this prospective quality-improvement pilot study were to implement a subcutaneous insulin protocol on a general medicine service, to identify barriers to implementation, and to determine the effect of this protocol on glycemic control. Eighty-nine patients with a preexisting diagnosis of type 2 diabetes or inpatient hyperglycemia were eligible. Study outcomes included resident acceptance of the protocol, insulin-ordering practices, and mean rate of hyperglycemia (glucose > 180 mg/dL) per person. Results were compared with those of a previously conducted observational study. RESULTS: Residents agreed to use the protocol in 56% of cases. Reasons for declining the protocol included severity of a patient's other disease states, desire to titrate oral medications, and fear of hypoglycemia. Basal and nutritional insulin were prescribed more often in the pilot group compared with at baseline (64% vs. 49% for basal, P = .05; 13% vs. 0% for nutritional, P < .001). Basal insulin was started after the first full hospital day in 42% of patients, and only one-third of patients with any hypo- or hyperglycemia had any subsequent changes in their insulin orders. The mean rate of hyperglycemia was not significantly different between groups (31.6% of measurements per patient vs. 33.3%, P = .85). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to a new inpatient subcutaneous insulin protocol was fair. Barriers included fear of hypoglycemia, delays in starting basal insulin, and clinical inertia. Quality improvement efforts likely need to target these barriers to successfully improve inpatient glycemic control.

Role of pharmacist counseling in preventing adverse drug events after hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalization and subsequent discharge home often involve discontinuity of care, multiple changes in medication regimens, and inadequate patient education, which can lead to adverse drug events (ADEs) and avoidable health care utilization. Our objectives were to identify drug-related problems during and after hospitalization and to determine the effect of patient counseling and follow-up by pharmacists on preventable ADEs. METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial of 178 patients being discharged home from the general medicine service at a large teaching hospital. Patients in the intervention group received pharmacist counseling at discharge and a follow-up telephone call 3 to 5 days later. Interventions focused on clarifying medication regimens; reviewing indications, directions, and potential side effects of medications; screening for barriers to adherence and early side effects; and providing patient counseling and/or physician feedback when appropriate. The primary outcome was rate of preventable ADEs. RESULTS: Pharmacists observed the following drug-related problems in the intervention group: unexplained discrepancies between patients' preadmission medication regimens and discharge medication orders in 49% of patients, unexplained discrepancies between discharge medication lists and postdischarge regimens in 29% of patients, and medication nonadherence in 23%. Comparing trial outcomes 30 days after discharge, preventable ADEs were detected in 11% of patients in the control group and 1% of patients in the intervention group (P = .01). No differences were found between groups in total ADEs or total health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist medication review, patient counseling, and telephone follow-up were associated with a lower rate of preventable ADEs 30 days after hospital discharge. Medication discrepancies before and after discharge were common targets of intervention.