Background: Community hospitals account for over 84% of all hospitals and over 94% of hospital admissions in the United States. In academic settings, implementation of an Inpatient Diabetes Management Service (IDMS) model of care has been shown to reduce rates of hyper- and hypoglycemia, hospital length of stay (LOS), and associated hospital costs. However, few studies to date have evaluated the implementation of a dedicated IDMS in a community hospital setting. Methods: This retrospective study examined the effects of changing the model of inpatient diabetes consultations from a local, private endocrine practice to a full-time endocrine hospitalist on glycemic control, LOS, and 30-day readmission rates in a 267-bed community hospital. Results: Overall diabetes patient days for the hospital were similar pre- and post-intervention (20,191 vs 20,262); however, the volume of patients seen by IDMS increased significantly after changing models. Rates of hyperglycemia decreased both among patients seen by IDMS (53.8% to 42.5%, P < .0001) and those not consulted on by IDMS (33.2% to 29.9%; P < .0001). When examined over time, rates of hypoglycemia steadily decreased in the 24 months after dedicated IDMS initiation ( P = .02); no such time effect was seen prior to IDMS ( P = .34). LOS and 30DRR were not significantly different between IDMS models. Conclusions: Implementation of an endocrine hospitalist-based IDMS at a community hospital was associated with significantly decreased hyperglycemia, while avoiding concurrent increases in hypoglycemia. Further studies are needed to investigate whether these effects are associated with improvements in clinical outcomes, patient or staff satisfaction scores, or total cost of care.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of guided reflection on self-care behaviors, confidence scores, and diabetes knowledge among adults with diabetes. A randomized controlled trial with a pre/posttest design was used to generate data from a convenience sample of 62 adults with diabetes recruited from a single site. After viewing a 30-minute video on how to manage diabetes, participants were randomized to a control group (CG) (usual care) or an intervention group (IG). The IG further engaged in a reflection educational session. For 8 weeks, the IG isolated diabetes-related events weekly, critically analyzed them using Gibbs’s reflective questions, and recorded their analysis in a journal. They also shared their perspective relative to using the journal in an audiotaped interview. Main measures included baseline and 8-week clinical outcomes (self-care maintenance, monitoring, management, and confidence scores and diabetes knowledge scores) and intervention acceptability. Compared to the CG, the IG had no statistically significant difference in self-care measures over time, although scores trended in the anticipated direction. Importantly, both groups had statistically significant improvement in self-care scores. Furthermore, there was statistically significant improvement in diabetes knowledge among IG participants. Informatively, IG critically analyzed 147 diabetes-related events concentrating on blood glucose, diet, exercise, monitoring, medication, sleep pattern, and health care visits. Participants found the guided reflection activity highly acceptable. Combined educational and reflection interventions are effective approaches for improving self-care outcomes and diabetes knowledge among adults with diabetes. Research concentrating on purposeful patient reflection is warranted in a larger sample paying careful attention to study limitations.
Family functioning was associated with family resilience. Future research should focus on replicating the study in a more heterogeneous population, with further investigation into the needs of family members of adults with diabetes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.