Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2002; 41(04): 277-281
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1634488
Original article
Schattauer GmbH

Computer Order Entry System Decreased Use of Sliding Scale Insulin Regimens

C. E. Achtmeyer
1   Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System
,
T. H. Payne
2   Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
,
B. D. Anawalt
1   Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System
2   Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received 01 October 2001

Accepted 14 March 2002

Publication Date:
07 February 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Introduction

Objectives: Despite evidence documenting their ineffectiveness, sliding scale insulin is a commonly used regimen for glucose management for hospitalized patients with diabetes mellitus. At the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Medical Center, where computer order entry has been mandated, we tested the hypothesis that an evidence-based minimal intervention order (supplemental insulin only when fasting serum glucoses exceeded 400 mg/dl) would decrease the use of sliding scale insulin orders.

Methods: Using a computerized order entry system, providers were initially offered a traditional sliding scale order or their own ad hoc orders for glycemic control of inpatients. After 34 weeks providers were offered a third option; a “minimal intervention order” with supplemental insulin only for glucose >400 mg/dl. We extracted all regular insulin orders and performed a retrospective review of insulin sliding scale orders written between December 1, 1998 and November 16, 1999. We compared the frequency of traditional insulin sliding scale orders before and after the introduction of the minimal intervention order.

Results: Nearly all orders in the first 34 weeks were traditional insulin sliding scales. We found a significant decrease in the number of traditional insulin sliding scale orders in the 16 weeks after the introduction of a computerized quick-order for minimal intervention, from 978/1007 (97.1%) to 254/398 (63.8%) (P <0.001).

Conclusions: A simple, evidenced-based quick-order in a computer order entry system rapidly and significantly reduced use of sliding scale insulin regimens for glycemic control of inpatients.

Keywords

Medical records systems - computerized - diabetes mellitus - physicians practice patterns - insulin
 

  • References

  • 1 Katz CM. How efficient is sliding scale insulin therapy? Problems with a “cookbook” approach in hospitalized patients. Postgrad Med 1991; 89: 46-57.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Macmillan DR. Insulin adjustment by the sliding scale method – a straw man who won’t stay down?. J Ky Med Assoc 1991; 89: 211-2.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Gill G, Macfarlane I. Are sliding – scale insulin regimens a recipe for diabetic instability? [letter]. Lancet 1997; 349: 1555.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Sawin CT. Action without benefit: the sliding scale of insulin use [editorial]. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157: 489.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Paauw DS. Did we learn evidence-based medicine in medical school? Some common medical mythology. J Am Board Fam Pract 1999; 12: 143-9.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Hirsch IB, Paauw DS, Brunzell J. Inpatient management of adults with diabetes. Diabetes Care 1995; 18: 870-8.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Queale WS, Seidler AJ, Brancati FL. Glycemic control and sliding scale insulin use in medical inpatients with diabetes mellitus. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157: 545-52.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Gearhart JG, Duncan 3rd JL, Replogle WH, Forbes RC, Walley EJ. Efficacy of sliding-scale insulin therapy: a comparison with prospective regimens. Fam Pract Res J 1994; 14: 313-22.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Queale WS, Seidler AJ, Brancati FL. The use of sliding scales for medical inpatients with diabetes [Abstract]. JGIM 1995; 10 Suppl 47.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR. Why don‘t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA 1999; 282 (Suppl. 15) 1458-65.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Eisenberg JM, Williams SV. Cost containment and changing physicians’ practice behavior. Can the fox learn to guard the chicken coop?. JAMA. 1981; 246: 2195-201.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Greco PJ, Eisenberg JM. Changing physicians’ practices. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1271-3.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Bates DW, Leape LL, Cullen DJ. et al. Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. JAMA 1998; 280 (Suppl. 15) 1311-6.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Bates DW, Kuperman GJ, Rittenberg E. et al. A randomized trial of a computer-based intervention to reduce utilization of redundant laboratory tests. Am J Med 1999; 106: 144-50.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith KS. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA 1998; 280 (Suppl. 15) 1339-46.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Mcdonald CJ, Wilson GA, McCabe GP. Physician response to computer reminders. JAMA 1980; 244 (Suppl. 14) 1579-81.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Pestotnick SL, Classen DC, Evans RS, Burke JP. Implementing antibiotic practice guidelines through computer-assisted support: clinical and financial outcomes. Ann Intern Med 1996; 124: 884-90.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Johnston ME, Langton KB, Haynes RB, Mathieu A. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome. A critical appraisal of research. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 135-42.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Bates DW, Cohen M, Leape LL. et al. Reducing the frequency of errors in medicine using information technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2001; 8: 299-308.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Evans RS, Pestotnik SL, Classen DC. et al. A computer-assisted management program for antibiotics and other anti-infective agents. N Engl J Med 1998; 338 (Suppl. 04) 232-8.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Evans RS, Classen DC, Pestotnik SL, Lundsgaarde HP, Burke JP. mproving empiric antibiotic selection using computer decision support. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 878-84.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Safran C, Rind DM, Davis RB. et al. Guidelines for management of HIV infection with computer-based patient’s records. Lancet 1995; 346: 341-6.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Geraci JM, Ashton CM, Kuykendall DH. et al. In-hospital complications among survivors of admission for congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or diabetes mellitus. J Gen Intern Med 1995; 10: 307-14.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Ashton CM, Kuykendall DH, Johnson ML, Wray NP, Wu L. The association between the quality of inpatient care and early readmission. Ann Intern Med 1995; 122: 415-21.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Bates DW, Boyle DL, Teich JM. Impact of computerized physician order entry on physician ime. Proceedings - the Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care. 1994: 996.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Overhage JM, Perkins S, Tierney WM, Mcdonald CJ. Controlled trial of direct physician order entry: effects on physicians’ time utilization in ambulatory primary care internal medicine practices. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2001; 8: 361-71.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar