Hypoglycaemia in residential aged care — ASN Events

Hypoglycaemia in residential aged care (#27)

Trisha Dunning 1 , Sam Korn , Sally Savage , Nicole Duggan , Susan Streat
  1. Deakin University/Barwon Health, Geelong, VIC, Australia

Background: Hypoglycaemia is the most significant adverse event associated with insulin and glucose lowering medicines (GLM).  Older people with diabetes (OPWD)  are particularly at risk..  Aims: 1). To determine hypoglycaemia rates in OPWD prescribed insulin and sulphonylureas (SU) in a regional  aged care facility.  2) Explore associations among hypoglycaemia and variables such as age, gender, and  blood glucose ranges.  Method: Data were collected from electronic (Platinum 5, BossNet) and hard copy medical records of 80 OPWD in December 2014 and entered into a database for analysis.  Data included demographic data, medicine regimen, blood glucose testing, reportable blood glucose and target ranges, hypoglycaemia risk assessment and care plan.  Four people collected the data. They were trained in the data collection process to limit bias and the data were checked for accuracy before analysis.  Hypoglycaemia was defined as < 4 mmol/L for the study.  Results:  Mean age 80 years ± SD 9.5, range 61–98: 47% were female. Hypoglycaemia data were often not documented or was difficult to locate. 38.8% were prescribed insulin, 5% a SU and 7.5% insulin and SU: 13% on insulin and 11% on SU had hypos in the preceding month.  Only 6.3% had a documented hypoglycaemia risk assessment but 80% had a hypoglycaemia care plan.  Most, 88.3%, had reportable blood glucose ranges documented; mean low level 3.9±SD 1.7 and mean upper level 16.9 ± SD 2.6.  Blood glucose testing was mostly too infrequent to detect hypoglycaemia or reflect the GLM action profile.  Most OPWD were tested weekly (34%). Most residents prescribed insulin were tested three or four times per day, but 32%  on insulin were tested weekly. Two OPWD with hypoglycaemia were admitted to hospital; one on insulin and one on SU.  The latter fell 3 times. Conclusions: Actual rates of hypoglycaemia were difficult to determine and may be under-recognised and under-reported. Blood glucose testing times do not reflect insulin or SU action profiles.  Hypoglycaemia care plans and reportable blood glucose ranges were documented but hypoglycaemia risk assessment was not documented in most OPWD; consequently it is not clear what information was used to plan hypoglycaemia care.