Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Diabetes Reports
Published in: Current Diabetes Reports 12/2020

01-12-2020 | Insulins | Hospital Management of Diabetes (A Wallia and J Seley, Section Editors)

Review of Intravenous and Subcutaneous Electronic Glucose Management Systems for Inpatient Glycemic Control

Authors: Preethika S. Ekanayake, Patricia S. Juang, Kristen Kulasa

Published in: Current Diabetes Reports | Issue 12/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The goal of this review is to summarize current literature on electronic glucose management systems (eGMS) and discuss their benefits and disadvantages in the inpatient setting.

Recent Findings

We review different versions of commercially available eGMS: Glucommander™ (Glytec, Greenville, SC), EndoToolR (MD Scientific LLC, Charlotte, NC), GlucoStabilizer™ (Medical Decision Network, Charlottesville, VA), GlucoCare™ (Pronia Medical Systems, KY), and discuss advantages such as reducing rates of hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, and glycemic variability. In addition, eCGMs offer a uniform standard of care and may improve workflows across institutions as well reduce barriers.

Summary

Despite ample literature on intravenous (IV) versions of eGMS, there is little published research on subcutaneous (SQ) insulin guidance. Although use of eGMS requires extensive training and institution-wide adoption, time spent on diabetes management is better facilitated by their use.
Literature
1.
American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care in the Hospital: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes 2020. Diabetes Care. 2020;43:S193–202.
2.
Umpierrez GE, Isaacs SD, Bazargan N, You X, Thaler LM, Kitabchi AE. Hyperglycemia: an independent marker of in-hospital mortality in patients with undiagnosed diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87:978–82.PubMed
3.
Van den Bergh G, Wouters P, Weekers F, Verwaest C, Bruyninckx F, Schetz M, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(19):1359–67.
4.
NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators. Hypoglycemia and risk of death in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1108–18.
5.
Krinsley JS, Grover A. Severe hypoglycemia in critically ill patients: risk factors and outcomes. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(10):2262–7.PubMed
6.
Goldberg PA, Siegel MD, Sherwin RS, Halickman JI, Lee M, Bailey VA, et al. Implementation of a safe and effective insulin infusion protocol in a medical intensive care unit. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(2):461–7.PubMed
7.
Bagshaw SM, Bellomo R, Jacka MJ, Egi M, Hart GK, George C, et al. Impact of early hypoglycemia and blood glucose variability on outcome in critical illness. Crit Care. 2009;13(3):R91.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Egi M, Bellomo R, Stachowski E, French CJ, Hart G. Variability of blood glucose concentration and short-term mortality in critically ill patients. Anesthesiology. 2006;105(2):244–52.PubMed
9.
White NH, Skor D, Santiago JV. Practical closed-loop insulin delivery. A system for the maintenance of overnight euglycemia and the calculation of basal insulin requirements in insulin-dependent diabetics. Ann Intern Med. 1982;97(2):210–3.PubMed
10.
Davidson PC, Steed RD, Bode BW. Glucommander: a computer directed insulin system shown to be safe, simple and effective in 120,618 h of operation. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(10):2418–23.PubMed
11.
Newton CA, Smiley D, Bode BW, Kitabchi AE, Davidson PC, Jacobs S, et al. A comparison study of continuous insulin infusion protocols in the medical intensive care unit: computer-guided vs. standard column based algorithms. J Hosp Med. 2010;5(8):432–7.PubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Rabinovich M, Grahl J, Durr E, Gayed R, Chester K, McFarland R, et al. Risk of hypoglycemia during insulin infusion directed by paper protocol versus electronic glycemic management system in critically ill patients at a large academic medical center. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018;12(1):47–52.PubMed
13.
Ullal J, McFarland R, Bachand M, Aloi J. Use of a computer-based insulin infusion algorithm to treat diabetic ketoacidosis in the emergency department. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016;18(2):100–3.PubMed
14.
Ullal J, Aloi JA, Reyes-Umpierrez D, Pasquel FJ, McFarland R, Rabinovich M, et al. Comparison of computer-guided versus standard insulin infusion regimens in patients with diabetic ketoacidosis. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018;12(1):39–46.PubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Desai D, Mehta D, Mathiyas P, Menon G, Schubart UK. Health care utilization and burden of diabetic ketoacidosis in the U.S. over the past decade: a nationwide analysis. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(8):1631–8.PubMed
16.
Umpierrez G, Cardona S, Pasquel F, Jacobs S, Peng L, Unigwe M, et al. Randomized controlled trial of intensive versus conservative glucose control in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: GLUCO-CABG trial. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:1665–72.PubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Cardona S, Pasquel FJ, Fayfman M, Peng L, Jacobs S, Vellanki P, et al. Hospitalization costs and clinical outcomes in CABG patients treated with intensive insulin therapy. J Diabetes Complicat. 2017;31(4):742–7.
18.
19.
Hammer MJ, Casper C, Gooley TA, O’Donnell PV, Boeckh M, Hirsch IB. The contribution of malglycemia to mortality among allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009;15(3):344–51.PubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Gebremedhin E, Behrendt CE, Nakamura R, Parker P, Salehian B. Severe hyperglycemia immediately after allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation is predictive of acute graft-versus-host disease. Inflammation. 2013;36(1):177–85.PubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Espina C, Jenkins I, Taylor L, Farah R, Cho E, Epworth J, et al. Blood glucose control using a computer-guided glucose management system in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2016;51(7):973–9.PubMed
22.
Phillips VL, Byrd AL, Adeel S, Peng L, Smiley DD, Umpierrez GE. A comparison of inpatient cost per day in general surgery patients with type 2 diabetes treated with basal-bolus versus sliding scale insulin regimens. Pharmacoecon Open. 2017;1(2):109–15.PubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Aloi J, Bode BW, Ullal J, Chidester P, McFarland RS, Bedingfield AE, et al. Comparison of an electronic glycemic management system versus provider-managed subcutaneous basal bolus insulin therapy in the hospital setting. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017;11(1):12–6.PubMed
24.
• Newsom R, Patty C, Camarena E, Sawyer R, McFarland R, Gray T, et al. Safely converting an entire academic medical center from sliding scale to basal bolus insulin via implementation of the eglycemic management system. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018;12(1):53–9 This study showed that the eGMS SQ version improved hyper and hypoglycemia, time in range, and reduction in length of stay, and demonstrated best practices for ordering appropriate basal/bolus insulin.PubMed
25.
Mann EA, Jones JA, Wolf SE, Wade CE. Computer decision support software safely improves glycemic control in the burn intensive care unit: a randomized controlled clinical study. J Burn Care Res. 2011;32(2):246–55.PubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Fogel SL, Baker CC. Effects of computerized decision support systems on blood glucose regulation in critically ill surgical patients. J Aml Coll Surg. 2013;216(4):828–33.
27.
John SM, Waters KL, Jivani K. Evaluating the implementation of the EndoTool glycemic control software system. Diabetes Spectr. 2018;31(1):26–30.PubMedPubMedCentral
28.
• Tanenberg RJ, Hardee S, Rothermel C, Drake AJ. Use of computer-guided glucose management system to improve glycemic control and address national quality measures: a 7-year, retrospective observational study at a tertiary care teaching hospital. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(3):331–41 This study showed marked improvement in quality of care with eGMS, leading to reduced hypoglycemia year by year despite doubling the volume of enrolled patients, rapid time to BG control, low glucose excursions, and low glycemic variability.PubMed
29.
Magee M. Improving IV insulin administration in a community hospital. J Vis Exp. 2012;64:1–8.
30.
Dumont C, Bourguignon C. Effect of a computerized insulin dose calculator on the process of glycemic control. Am J Crit Care. 2012;21(2):106–15.PubMed
31.
Juneja R, Roudebush C, Kumar N, Macy A, Golas A, Wall D, et al. Utilization of a computerized intravenous insulin infusion program to control blood glucose in the intensive care unit. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2007;9(3):232–40.PubMed
32.
Juneja R, Roudebush CP, Nasraway SA, Golas AA, Jacobi J, Carroll J, et al. Computerized intensive insulin dosing can mitigate hypoglycemia and achieve tight glycemic control when glucose measurement is performed frequently and on time. Crit Care. 2009;13(R163):1–10.
33.
Wiener RS, Wiener DC, Larson RJ. Benefits and risks of tight glucose control in critically ill adults: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2008;300(8):933–44.PubMed
34.
Saur NM, Kongable GL, Holewinski S, O’Brien K, Nasraway SA. Software-guided insulin dosing: tight glycemic control and decreased glycemic derangements in critically ill patients. Mayo Clin Proc. 2013;88(9):920–9.PubMed
35.
Dinglas C, Muscat J, Adams T, Peragallo-Dittko V, Vintzileos A, Heo HJ. Software-guided insulin dosing improves intrapartum glycemic management in women with diabetes mellitus. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(2):191.e1–6.
36.
37.
Johnston KC, Bruno A, Pauls Q, Hall CE, Barrett KM, Barsan W, et al. Intensive vs standard treatment of hyperglycemia and functional outcome in patients with acute ischemic strok: the SHINE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;322(4):326–35.PubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Juneja R, Golas AA, Caroll J, Nelson D, Abad VJ, Roudebush CP, et al. Safety and effectiveness of a computerized subcutaneous insulin program to treat inpatient hyperglycemia. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008;2(3):384–91.PubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Goldberg PA, Siegel MD, Sherwin RS, Halickman JI, Lee M, Bailey VA, et al. Implementation of a safe and effective insulin infusion protocol in a medical intensive care unit. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(2):461–7.PubMed
40.
Marvin MR, Inzucchi SE, Besterman BJ. Computerization of the Yale insulin infusion protocol and potential insights into causes of hypoglycemia with intravenous insulin. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013;15(3):246–52.PubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Marvin MR, Inzucchi SE, Besterman BJ. Minimization of hypoglycemia as an adverse event during insulin infusion: further refinement of the Yale protocol. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016;18(8):480–6.PubMedPubMedCentral
42.
Jacobi J, Bircher N, Krinsley J, Agus M, Braithwaite SS, Deutschman C, et al. Guidelines for the use of an insulin infusion for the management of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(12):3251–76.PubMed
43.
Kulasa K. Computer guided insulin dosing. Presented at Diabetes Technology Society Virtual Hospital Diabetes Meeting, 2020.
44.
Ullal J, Aloi JA. Subcutaneous insulin dosing calculators for inpatient glucose control. Curr Diab Rep. 2019;19(11):120.PubMed
45.
Maynard G, Kulasa K, Ramos P, Childers D, Clay B, Sebasky M, et al. Impact of a hypoglycemia reduction bundle and a systems approach to inpatient glycemic management. Endocr Pract. 2015;21(4):355–67.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Review of Intravenous and Subcutaneous Electronic Glucose Management Systems for Inpatient Glycemic Control
Authors
Preethika S. Ekanayake
Patricia S. Juang
Kristen Kulasa
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Diabetes Reports / Issue 12/2020
Print ISSN: 1534-4827
Electronic ISSN: 1539-0829
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-020-01364-2

Other articles of this Issue 12/2020

Current Diabetes Reports 12/2020 Go to the issue

Obesity (KM Gadde and P Singh, Section Editors)

Does Weight Loss Improve Clinical Outcomes in Overweight and Obese Patients with Heart Failure?

Economics and Policy in Diabetes (AA Baig and N Laiteerapong, Section Editors)

Evidence for Mental Health Contributions to Medical Care in Diabetes Management: Economic and Professional Considerations

Pathogenesis of Type 1 Diabetes (A Pugliese and SJ Richardson, Section Editors)

A Question of Tolerance—Antigen-Specific Immunotherapy for Type 1 Diabetes

Pediatric Type 2 and Monogenic Diabetes (O Pinhas-Hamiel, Section Editor)

Impact of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Antidiabetic Medications on Bone Metabolism

Obesity (KM Gadde and P Singh, Section Editors)

Sleep Extension: A Potential Target for Obesity Treatment

Pharmacologic Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes (HE Lebovitz and G Bahtiyar, Section Editors)

Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter Type 2 (SGLT-2) Inhibitors and Ketogenesis: the Good and the Bad

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Heart Failure Video

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch now

Watch this official video from ACC.24 to hear Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discuss last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits