Search

Introduction Older people in care homes living with frailty are less likely to benefit from tight glycaemic control in the management of type 2 diabetes with increased risk of adverse effects for example hypoglycaemia, falls and hospital admission. We wished to ascertain the scale of the problem and reduce overtreatment. We defined overtreatment based on American Diabetes Association guidelines as being on an agent that can cause hypoglycaemia and having an HBA1C of ≤53 mmol/mol or, an HbA1c 53–64 mmol/mol with either three or more co-morbidities. Methods In 2016, we audited the management of type 2 diabetes in older people discharged from LTHT to care homes. We discussed our concerns with diabetes and geriatric medicine colleagues across medical, nursing and pharmacy disciplines. We engaged the support of the citywide diabetes network which comprises secondary care colleagues, general practitioners and pharmacists. We presented the findings of our initial audit to colleagues within primary and secondary care through departmental meetings and citywide network meetings. We wrote a new guideline, specifically for frail older people that was disseminated citywide through these networks. We re-audited in 2020. Results In total, 113 cases were reviewed in 2016 and 105 cases in 2020. In 2020, only 6% (6 patients) were overtreated compared to 38% (43 patients) in 2016. Conclusions There has been a marked reduction in overtreatment which should result in less adverse events. We believe the reasons for success lie in wide engagement of relevant stakeholder groups around an issue that is important, large in scale and meaningful to both patient and clinician. There are potential cost savings from reducing medications and reducing harm.

Introduction Discussing preferences around cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is recommended to patients who wish to discuss this, or where there is foreseeable risk of life-threatening clinical deterioration. Our team felt that we discussed this routinely for our inpatients but wished to investigate how we did this, when we did this, why decisions were made and who led these discussions. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the electronic patient notes of 118 patients recently discharged from elderly medicine between February and November 2020 and recorded demographic details, co-morbidities and outcomes of discussions regarding resuscitation. Results 100/118 patients had a RESPECT form documenting preferences. Of these 100 patients, 97% had a DNACPR recommendation, 2 had a ‘for resuscitation’ recommendation and one was undecided. 69% of patients had their preferences recorded during the current admission. 43% of discussions were led by a tier 1/2 doctor. 21% of discussions were led by a tier 3 doctor. 23% of discussions were led by a consultant. It was unclear who had led the discussion 13% of the time. 29/97 patients had a DNACPR due to their wishes. 16/97 patients had a DNACPR based on clinical grounds that it would not succeed. 33/97 patients had a DNACPR on the grounds that burden outweighed risks and they had capacity In 19/97 patients the reason for DNACPR was not clearly documented. There were 6 discussions where there was distress or disagreement—all of the discussions resulted in DNACPR recommendation 1 patient had a DNACPR reversed during their admission and none were reversed afterwards. Conclusion Systematically discussing preferences around resuscitation is feasible and rarely results in distress. The majority of patients have a recommendation for DNACPR and discussions are led by ‘junior’ doctors.

Introduction: Although older individuals are more prone to hypoglycaemia, it is not known if they have sufficient understanding of the risks of hypoglycaemia or the factors that predispose to it. We evaluated the effectiveness of hypoglycaemia education and examined the factors that increased susceptibility to hypoglycaemia among older people with diabetes. Methods: Forty-five patients (male/female) aged >65 years and known to have diabetes were identified through outpatient clinics at a secondary care hospital. Information relating to education received, awareness of hypoglycaemia and associated risk factors was collected using a standard questionnaire. Additionally, data regarding demographics, treatment regimes, patient attitudes, hypoglycaemic awareness and risks and barriers to self-management of diabetes was collected. Patients were categorised as low, moderate and high risk based on their responses. Independent sample t-tests and Analysis of Variance were carried out to identify factors contributing to high hypoglycaemic risk. Results: Overall, 70% of the patients reported receiving education about hypoglycaemia from health professionals and 95% of them reported good understanding of hypoglycaemia and were able to self-test. Proportion of women receiving education was, however, lower than men (52% women versus 88% men). Compared with men, women were less likely to recognise (59 versus 73%), or act appropriately to a hypoglycaemic episode (59 versus 78%). The mean number of hypoglycaemic episodes per year (41 versus 12) and the duration of hypoglycaemia (9.9 versus 6.3 min) was also greater among women compared with men. The duration of diabetes (P = 0.018), female gender, type 1 diabetes (0.002) and lack awareness of medications causing hypos (P = 0.006) were strong predictors of hypoglycaemia risk. Conclusions: There are significant gaps in education around hypoglycaemia in older people with diabetes. Women, people with longer duration and type 1 diabetes in particular, need additional attention and future educational initiatives need to address these issues.

Patients may be referred to Acute Medical Units (AMUs) with a diagnosis of ‘acopia’. This term is offensive and lazy, implying fault on the part of the patient and allowing the assessing doctor to erroneously label the patient as a ‘social admission’ when, in fact, such patients are likely to be frail with co-morbidities and have an acute (potentially reversible) illness. Frail older patients should be assessed using the principles of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, informed by an understanding of the concept of frailty and of geriatric syndromes such as falls and delirium.

Background:In an emergency, the non-availability of a conventional paediatric tracheostomy tube is a therapeutic challenge for the attending surgeon.Objective:To describe a simple alternative to a paediatric tracheostomy tube for use in an emergency situation.Method:Case report of a 14-year-old boy who developed tracheomalacia following partial cricotracheal resection for subglottic stenosis. As a suitably sized tracheostomy tube (with a long narrow segment) was not available, an endotracheal tube was modified and used successfully. Details of the modification, and a relevant literature review, are also discussed.Conclusion:In the paediatric age group, when an appropriately sized tracheostomy tube is not available, a modified endotracheal tube is a simple temporary alternative; this may be especially useful in an emergency.