Healthcare professionals' competencies and confidence in managing hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: In hospitals, 15%-20% of patients have diabetes. Therefore, all healthcare professionals (HCPs) must have a basic knowledge of in-hospital diabetes management. This survey assessed the knowledge of diabetes among HCPs in Denmark. METHODS: A 27-item questionnaire was developed and reviewed independently before the survey was distributed. The questionnaire contained seven baseline questions on the HCPs' current workplace, educational level, usual shift routines and years of experience, 18 multiple-choice questions and 2 cases. RESULTS: A total of 252 completed questionnaires were returned by 133 (52.8%) physicians, 101 (40.1%) nurses and 18 (7.1%) healthcare assistants. HCPs answered 50% of the questions correctly. Having experience from endocrinological departments increased the correct response score (0%-100%) by 6.2% points (95% CI 0.3-12.1) (p = 0.039) and 3.1% points (95% CI 1.5-4.7) for every increase in confidence level on a scale from 1 to 10 (p < 0.001). HCPs scored 8 out of 10 on a confidence level scale on average. In a fictive case, 50% of HCPs administered the correct bolus insulin dose. Hyperglycaemia (>10.0 mmol/L) and hypoglycaemia (<3.9 mmol/L) were correctly identified by around 40% of HCPs. Hypoglycaemia was rated more important than hyperglycaemia by most HCPs. CONCLUSION: Significant gaps in identifying hypo- and hyperglycaemia and correct administration of bolus insulin have been identified, which could be targeted in future education for HCPs. HCPs answered 50% of questions related to in-hospital diabetes management correctly. Experience from endocrinological departments and self-rated confidence levels are associated with HCPs' in-hospital diabetes competencies.

Gustatory sweating in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: Prevalence and risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: Gustatory sweating (GS) is characterized by profuse sweating during or immediately after ingestion of food and is known as a complication of diabetes mellitus (DM). This study aimed to determine the prevalence of GS and to characterize the sweating in a cohort of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM and T2DM) as compared with a control group. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, 665 outpatients with T1DM and 505 outpatients with T2DM filled in an 8-point questionnaire about GS. Answers were paired with medical data from the electronic patient records to explore associations with DM complications. The control group consisted of 1158 persons without DM answering the same questionnaire in an online version. RESULTS: In people with T1DM and T2DM, the prevalence of GS was 10% (95% CI 7%-12%) and 13% (95% CI 10%-16%), respectively. In the control group, the prevalence of GS was 5% (95% CI 3%-6%). Most commonly, people sweat on the face and/or head and upper body with a duration of 10-30 min albeit in the control group <10 min. In patients with T1DM, increased HbA1c was associated with GS (OR 1.3 [95% CI 1.05-1.6], p = .016), and in T2DM, younger age (OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.92-0.99), p = .006), presence of severe peripheral neuropathy (OR 2.33 [95% CI 1.04-5.2], p = .039) and absence of proliferative retinopathy were associated with GS (OR 0.22 [95% CI 0.07-0.71], p = .011). CONCLUSION: We found the prevalence of gustatory sweating of 11% in a hospital-based cohort of patients with T1DM and T2DM. This was twice as high as in non-diabetic control persons. Associations between GS and known diabetes complications could only be demonstrated in T2DM. Compared with a control group without DM, odds for GS are higher in people with DM and age >45.

Study rationale and design of the EANITIATE study (EmpAgliflozin compared to NPH Insulin for sTeroId diAbeTEs) - a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial of safety and efficacy of treatment with empagliflozin compared with NPH-insulin in patients with newly onset diabetes following initiation of glucocorticoid treatment.

BACKGROUND: A well-known metabolic side effect from treatment with glucocorticoids is glucocorticoid-induced diabetes mellitus (GIDM). Guidelines on the management of GIDM in hospitalized patients (in the non-critical care setting), recommend initiation of insulin therapy. The scientific basis and evidence for superiority of insulin therapy over other glucose lowering therapies is however poor and associated with episodes of both hypo- and hyperglycaemia. There is an unmet need for an easier, safe and convenient therapy for glucocorticoid-induced diabetes. METHODS: EANITIATE is a Danish, open, prospective, multicenter, randomized (1:1), parallel group study in patients with new-onset diabetes following treatment with glucocorticoids (> 20 mg equivalent prednisolone dose/day) with blinded endpoint evaluation (PROBE design). Included patients are randomized to either a Sodium-Glucose-Cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor or neutral protamin Hagedorn (NPH) insulin and followed for 30 days. Blinded continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) will provide data for the primary endpoint (mean daily blood glucose) and on glucose fluctuations in the two treatment arms. Secondary endpoints are patient related outcomes, hypoglycaemia, means and measures of variation for all values and for time specific glucose values. This is a non-inferiority study with the intent to demonstrate that treatment with empagliflozin is not inferior to treatment with NPH insulin when it comes to glycemic control and side effects. DISCUSSION: This novel approach to management of glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia has not been tested before and if SGLT2 inhibition with empaglifozin compared to NPH-insulin is a safe, effective and resource sparing treatment for GIDM, it has the potential to improve the situation for affected patients and have health economic benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu no.: 2018-002640-82. Prospectively registered November 20th. 2018. Date of first patient enrolled: June 4th. 2019. This protocol article is based on the EANITATE protocol version 1.3, dated 29. January 2018.

Catheter Related Escherichia hermannii Sepsis in a Haemodialysis Patient.

Escherichia hermannii is an extremely rare etiological agent of invasive infection, and thus, the bacterium was initially considered non-pathogenic. However, in five previously reported case reports E. hermannii has been implicated as the sole pathogen. Our case report describes blood stream infection with E. hermannii in a haemodialysis patient with persisting symptoms, high fever and inflammatory markers despite appropriate antibiotic treatment until replacement of the dialysis catheter. We suspect biofilm formation to be a crucial pathogenic feature for E. hermannii in the maintenance of an infection, which stresses the necessity of antibiotic treatment along with catheter replacement in bloodstream- and catheter-related infection with E. hermannii.