Gerry Rayman

Summary: Introduction: Surgery in patients with diabetes mellitus is associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared with those who do not have diabetes mellitus. This is likely multifactorial and could be attributed to organisational issues; dysglycaemia; hospital‐acquired diabetic ketoacidosis; errors with insulin prescribing and administration; issues with fluids and electrolytes; and systemic and surgical site infections. There was a need to update guidance for the peri‐operative management of diabetes mellitus given improvements in our understanding, introduction of novel drugs and development of wearable technologies. Methods: This was a multidisciplinary consensus statement with a diverse authorship group, including diabetologists; anaesthetists; surgeons; pharmacists; surgical diabetes inpatient specialist nurses; and patients with lived experience. We undertook a directed literature search and a three‐round Delphi process to develop, refine and agree recommendations. Results: Following three rounds, 38 recommendations were included, spanning all phases of the peri‐operative pathway. Recommendations were made for organisations and general principles for the management of patients with diabetes, aiming to improve pathways, implement protocols and support training. We prioritise individualised care plans, encourage clinical judgement regarding proceeding with surgery with out‐of‐range HbA1c concentrations and recommend ensuring appropriate insulin regimens are prescribed and administered. We also provide guidance for capillary blood glucose and ketone monitoring and management; safe handovers of care; and multidisciplinary care plans for the peri‐operative use of wearables. Discussion: This consensus statement provides principles to be applied throughout the entire peri‐operative pathway by healthcare professionals, institutions and patients. It is hoped that the implementation of these key recommendations will improve experience and outcomes for patients with diabetes mellitus having surgery.

Introduction Effective management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) consists of lifestyle modification and therapy optimisation. While glycaemic monitoring can be used as a tool to guide these changes, this can be challenging with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). The FreeStyle Libre 3 (FSL3) is a real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system designed to replace SMBG. The evidence for the benefit of CGM in people with T2DM on non-intensive insulin regimens is limited. This study aims primarily to assess the glycaemic impact of FSL3 in people with suboptimally controlled T2DM treated with basal-only insulin regimens plus sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor and/or glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 agonist. Methods and analysis This is an open-label, multicentre, parallel design, randomised (2:1) controlled trial. Recruitment has been offered across 24 clinical centres in the UK and nationally through self-referral. Adults with T2DM treated with basal-only insulin regimens plus SGLT-2 inhibitor and/or GLP-1 agonist and with screening HbA1c from ≥59 mmol/mol to ≤97 mmol/mol are included. Eligible participants will be randomised to either FSL3 (intervention) for 32 weeks or continuation of SMBG (control). The study is split into two phases, each of 16 weeks duration: phase 1 consisting of self-management with basal-insulin self-titration and phase 2 where additional therapies may be initiated. Control group participants may subsequently enter an optional extension phase to receive FSL3. The primary endpoint is the difference between treatment groups in mean change from baseline in HbA1c at 16 weeks. Secondary outcomes include HbA1c at 32 weeks, CGM-based metrics, therapy changes, physical activity levels and psychosocial measures. An economic evaluation for costs and patient outcomes will be undertaken. Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the Health Research Authority, Health and Care Research Wales and the West Midlands-Edgbaston Research Ethics Committee (reference: 23/WM/0092). Study results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number NCT05944432. Secondary identifying number Identifier assigned by the sponsor: ADC-UK-PMS-22057. Protocol version Revision D. Dated, 13 December 2024.

Aim: To determine whether it was feasible, safe and acceptable for ambulance clinicians to use capillary blood ketone meters for ‘high‐risk’ diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) recognition and fluid initiation, to inform the need for a full‐powered, multi‐centre trial.Methods: Adopting a stepped‐wedge controlled design, participants with hyperglycaemia (capillary blood glucose >11.0 mmol/L) or diabetes and unwell were recruited. ‘High‐risk’ DKA intervention participants (capillary blood ketones ≥3.0 mmol/L) received paramedic‐led fluid therapy. Participant demographic and clinical data were collated from ambulance and hospital care records. Twenty ambulance and Emergency Department clinicians were interviewed to understand their hyperglycaemia and DKA care experiences.Results: In this study, 388 participants were recruited (Control: n = 203; Intervention: n = 185). Most presented with hyperglycaemia, and incidence of type 1 and type 2 diabetes was 18.5% and 74.3%, respectively. Ketone meter use facilitated ‘high‐risk’ DKA identification (control: 2.5%, n = 5; intervention: 6.5%, n = 12) and was associated with improved hospital pre‐alerting. Ambulance clinicians appeared to have a high index of suspicion for hospital‐diagnosed DKA participants. One third (33.3%; n = 3) of Control and almost half (45.5%; n = 5) of Intervention DKA participants received pre‐hospital fluid therapy.Key interview themes included clinical assessment, ambulance DKA fluid therapy, clinical handovers; decision support tool; hospital DKA management; barriers to hospital DKA care.Conclusions: Ambulance capillary blood ketone meter use was deemed feasible, safe and acceptable. Opportunities for improved clinical decision making, support and safety‐netting, as well as in‐hospital DKA care, were recognised. As participant recruitment was below progression threshold, it is recommended that future‐related research considers alternative trial designs. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04940897.

People with diabetes are more likely to have surgical interventions than the general population and account for as many as 25% of surgical cases (1). They People with diabetes are more likely to have surgical interventions than the general population and account for as many as 25% of surgical cases (1). They

Context Hyperglycemia in hospital inpatients without pre-existing diabetes is associated with increased mortality. However, the independent contribution of hyperglycemia to healthcare-associated infection (HAI), acute kidney injury (AKI), and stroke is unclear. Objective To investigate the relationship between hyperglycemia and adverse clinical outcomes in hospital for patients with and without diabetes. Design Diabetes IN-hospital: Glucose and Outcomes (DINGO) was a 26-week (October 2019 – March 2020) prospective cohort study. Clinical and glucose data were collected up to the 14^th day of admission. Primary stratification was by hyperglycemia, defined as ≥2 random capillary blood glucose (BG) measurements ≥11.1 mmol/L (≥200 mg/dL). Propensity weighting for nine clinical characteristics, was performed to allow interrogation of causality. To maintain the positivity assumption, patients with HbA1c > 12.0% were excluded and pre-hospital treatment not adjusted for. Setting The Royal Melbourne Hospital, a quaternary referral hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Patients Admissions with at least two capillary glucose values and length of stay >24 hours were eligible, with half randomly sampled. Outcome measures HAI, AKI, stroke, and mortality. Results Of 2,558 included admissions, 1,147 (45%) experienced hyperglycemia in hospital. Following propensity-weighting and adjustment, hyperglycemia in hospital was found to, independently of nine covariables, contribute an increased risk of in-hospital HAI (130 [11.3%] vs.100 [7.1%], adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.01-1.05, p = 0.003), AKI (120 [10.5%] vs. 59 [4.2%], aOR 1.07, 95%CI 1.05-1.09, p < 0.001), and stroke (10 [0.9%] vs. 1 [0.1%], aOR 1.05, 95%CI 1.04-1.06, p < 0.001). Conclusions In hospital inpatients (HbA1c ≤ 12.0%), irrespective of diabetes status and pre-hospital glycaemia, hyperglycemia increases the risk of in-hospital HAI, AKI, and stroke compared with those not experiencing hyperglycemia.

Background: There has been a significant increase in the use of wearable diabetes technologies in the outpatient setting over recent years, but this has not consistently translated into inpatient use. Methods: An online survey was undertaken to understand the current use of technology to support inpatient diabetes care in the United Kingdom. Results: Responses were received from 42 different organizations representing 104 hospitals across the United Kingdom. Significant variation was found between organizations in the use of technology to support safe, effective inpatient diabetes care. Benefits of the use of technology were reported, and areas of good practice identified. Conclusion: Technology supports good inpatient diabetes care, but there is currently variation in its use. Guidance has been developed which should drive improvements in the use of technology and hence improvements in the safety and effectiveness of inpatient diabetes care. Key recommendations include implementation of this guidance (especially for continuous glucose monitoring), ensuring specialist support is available for the use of wearable diabetes technology in hospital, optimizing information sharing across the health care system, and making full use of data from networked glucose and ketone meters.

People with diabetes admitted to hospital are at risk of diabetes related complications including hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis. Point-of-care (POC) tests undertaken at the patient bedside, for glucose, ketones, and other analytes, are a key component of monitoring people with diabetes, to ensure safety. POC tests implemented with a quality framework are critical to ensuring accuracy and veracity of results and preventing erroneous clinical decision making. POC results can be used for self-management of glucose levels in those well-enough and/or by healthcare professionals to identify unsafe levels. Connectivity of POC results to electronic health records further offers the possibility of utilising these results proactively to identify patients ‘at risk’ in real-time and for audit purposes. In this article, the key considerations when implementing POC tests for diabetes in-patient management are reviewed and potential to drive improvements using networked glucose and ketone measurements are discussed. In summary, new advances in POC technology should allow people with diabetes and the teams looking after them whilst in hospital to integrate to provide safe and effective care.

This article is the second of a two-part series providing a scoping review and summary of the Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care (JBDS-IP) guidelines on the use of diabetes technology in people with diabetes admitted to hospital. The first part reviewed the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in hospital. In this article, we focus on the use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII; insulin pumps) and hybrid closed-loop systems in hospital. JBDS-IP advocates enabling people who can self-manage and are willing and capable of using CSII to continue doing so as they would do out of hospital. CSII should be discontinued if the individual is critically ill or hemodynamically unstable. For individuals on hybrid closed-loop systems, the system should be discontinued from auto-mode, and may be used individually (as CGM only or CSII only, if criteria are met). Continuing in closed-loop mode may only be done so under specialist guidance from the Diabetes Team, where the diabetes teams are comfortable and knowledgeable about the specific devices used. Health care organizations need to have clear local policies and guidance to support individuals using these wearable technologies, and ensure the relevant workforce is capable and skilled enough to ensure their safe use within the hospital setting.

Increasing numbers of people, particularly with type 1 diabetes (T1D), are using wearable technologies. That is, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) pumps, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, and hybrid closed-loop systems, which combine both these elements. Given over a quarter of all people admitted to hospital have diabetes, there is a need for clinical guidelines for when people using them are admitted to hospital. The Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care (JBDS-IP) provide a scoping review and summary of guidelines on the use of diabetes technology in people with diabetes admitted to hospital. JBDS-IP advocates enabling people who can self-manage and use their own diabetes technology to continue doing so as they would do out of hospital. Whilst people with diabetes are recommended to achieve a target of 70% time within range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L [70-180 mg/dL]), this can be very difficult to achieve whilst unwell. We therefore recommend targeting hypoglycemia prevention as a priority, keeping time below 3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) at < 1%, being aware of looming hypoglycemia if glucose is between 4.0 and 5.9 mmol/L (72-106 mg/dL), and consider intervening, particularly if there is a downward CGM trend arrow. Health care organizations need clear local policies and guidance to support individuals using diabetes technologies, and ensure the relevant workforce is capable and skilled enough to ensure their safe use within the hospital setting. The current set of guidelines is divided into two parts. Part 1, which follows below, outlines the guidance for use of CGM in hospital. The second part outlines guidance for use of CSII and hybrid closed-loop in hospital.