Current Literature: Standardization of IV Insulin Therapy Improves the Efficiency and Safety of Blood Glucose Control in Critically Ill Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Aggressive glycemic control improves mortality and morbidity in critically ill adults; however, implementation of such a strategy can be logistically difficult. This study evaluates the efficiency and safety of a nurse-managed insulin protocol in critically ill adults. DESIGN: Combined retrospective-prospective before-after cohort study. SETTING: Twenty-one bed medical/surgical intensive care unit (ICU) in a tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: Two cohorts of 50 consecutive ICU patients requiring insulin infusions. INTERVENTION: Patients in the control cohort received insulin infusions titrated according to target blood glucose ranges and sliding scales at the physician's discretion. Patients in the interventional cohort received an insulin infusion adjusted using a standardized protocol targeting a blood glucose of 4.5 to 6.1 mmol/L (81 to 110 mg/dL). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Efficiency was measured by comparing the time to reach, and the time spent within, the target range between cohorts. Safety was assessed by comparing the incidence of severe hypoglycemia, the frequency of rescue dextrose administration, and the cumulative time that the infusion was held for hypoglycemia between cohorts. Patients in the interventional cohort reached their target more rapidly (11.3± 7.9 vs 16.4 ± 12.6 hours; p = .028) and maintained their blood glucose within the target range longer (11.5 ± 3.7 vs 7.1 ± 5.0 hours/day; p < .001) than controls. The standardized protocol yielded a 4-fold reduction in the incidence of severe hypoglycemia (4 vs 16%; p = .046) and reduced the median frequency of dextrose rescue therapy (0 [0 to 0.91] vs 0.17 [0 to 1.2] episodes/patient per day; p = .01) as compared with controls. CONCLUSION: Standardization of intensive insulin therapy improves the efficiency and safety of glycemic control in critically ill adults.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.081 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".