Hospital hypoglycemia: From observation to action

Haritha Bellam MD , Susan S. Braithwaite MD
{"title":"Hospital hypoglycemia: From observation to action","authors":"Haritha Bellam MD ,&nbsp;Susan S. Braithwaite MD","doi":"10.1016/S1557-0843(10)80007-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><strong>Background:</strong> A preponderance of evidence indicates that when treatment of hyperglycemia with insulin is provided for certain hospitalized populations, the attainment of appropriate glycemic targets improves nonglycemic outcomes such as mortality rates, morbidities (eg, wound infection, critical illness polyneuropathy, bacteremia, new renal insufficiency), duration of ventilator dependency, transfusion requirements, and length of hospital stay. Nevertheless, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intensive insulin therapy and studies of outcomes before and after implementation of tight glycemic control have consistently recognized an increased incidence of hypoglycemia as a complication associated with the use of lower glycemic targets and higher doses of insulin.</p><p><strong>Objectives:</strong> This commentary compares the quality of the available evidence on the clinical impact of iatrogenic hypoglycemia. We present treatment strategies designed to prevent iatrogenic hypoglycemia in the hospital setting.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> The PubMed database and online citations of articles tracked subsequent to publication were searched for articles on the epidemiology, clinical impact, and mechanism of harm of hypoglycemia published since 1986. In addition, we searched the literature for RCTs conducted since 2001 concerning intensive insulin therapy in the hospital critical care setting, including meta-analyses; letters to the editor were excluded. The retrieved studies were scanned and chosen selectively for full-text review based on the study size and design, novelty of findings, and evidence related to the possible clinical impact of hypoglycemia. Reference lists from the retrieved studies were searched for additional studies. Reports were summarized for the purpose of comparing and contrasting the qualitative nature of information about iatrogenic hypoglycemia in the hospital.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> Eight RCTs of intensive glycemic management, 16 observational studies of hospitalized patients with hypoglycemia (including studies of outcomes before and after implementation of tight glycemic control), and 4 case reports on patients with hypoglycemia were selected for discussion of the incidence of hypoglycemia, significance of hypoglycemia as a marker or cause of poor prognosis, and clinical harm of hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemia was identified in clinical trials as either a category of adverse events or a complication of intensified insulin treatment. For example, a recent meta-analysis found that the incidence of severe hypoglycemia was higher among critically ill patients treated with intensive insulin therapy than among control patients, with a pooled relative risk of 6.0 (95% CI, 4.5–8.0). In the largest multisite RCT on glycemic control among patients in intensive care units (ICUs) conducted to date, deaths were reported for 27.5% (829/3010 patients) in the intensive-treatment group and 24.9% (751/3012 patients) in the conventional-treatment group (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02–1.28; <em>P</em> = 0.02). In another multisite ICU study, although the intensive and control groups had similar mortality rates, the mortality rate was higher among hypoglycemic participants than among nonhypoglycemic participants (32.2% vs 13.6%, respectively; <em>P</em> &lt; 0.01). Pooled data from 2 singlesite studies in medical and surgical ICUs revealed an increased risk of hypoglycemia in the intensive-treatment group compared with the conventional-treatment group (11.3% [154/1360] and 1.8% [25/1388], respectively; <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001), but the hospital mortality rate was similar for the 2 groups (50.6% [78/154] and 52.0% [13/25], respectively). Specific sequelae of hypoglycemia affecting individual patients were described in the RCTs as well as in the observational studies. New guidelines for glycemic control have recently been issued, but results of the studies using the new targets are not yet available. We propose treatment strategies designed to prevent iatrogenic hypoglycemia in the hospital setting.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> In response to the growing evidence on the risk of hypoglycemia during intensified glycemic management of hospitalized patients, professional organizations recently revised targets for glycemic control. It is appropriate for institutions to reevaluate hospital protocols for glycemic management with intravenous insulin and, on general wards, to implement standardized order sets for use of subcutaneous insulin to achieve beneficial targets using safe strategies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100678,"journal":{"name":"Insulin","volume":"5 1","pages":"Pages 16-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1557-0843(10)80007-7","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Insulin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1557084310800077","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Background: A preponderance of evidence indicates that when treatment of hyperglycemia with insulin is provided for certain hospitalized populations, the attainment of appropriate glycemic targets improves nonglycemic outcomes such as mortality rates, morbidities (eg, wound infection, critical illness polyneuropathy, bacteremia, new renal insufficiency), duration of ventilator dependency, transfusion requirements, and length of hospital stay. Nevertheless, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intensive insulin therapy and studies of outcomes before and after implementation of tight glycemic control have consistently recognized an increased incidence of hypoglycemia as a complication associated with the use of lower glycemic targets and higher doses of insulin.

Objectives: This commentary compares the quality of the available evidence on the clinical impact of iatrogenic hypoglycemia. We present treatment strategies designed to prevent iatrogenic hypoglycemia in the hospital setting.

Methods: The PubMed database and online citations of articles tracked subsequent to publication were searched for articles on the epidemiology, clinical impact, and mechanism of harm of hypoglycemia published since 1986. In addition, we searched the literature for RCTs conducted since 2001 concerning intensive insulin therapy in the hospital critical care setting, including meta-analyses; letters to the editor were excluded. The retrieved studies were scanned and chosen selectively for full-text review based on the study size and design, novelty of findings, and evidence related to the possible clinical impact of hypoglycemia. Reference lists from the retrieved studies were searched for additional studies. Reports were summarized for the purpose of comparing and contrasting the qualitative nature of information about iatrogenic hypoglycemia in the hospital.

Results: Eight RCTs of intensive glycemic management, 16 observational studies of hospitalized patients with hypoglycemia (including studies of outcomes before and after implementation of tight glycemic control), and 4 case reports on patients with hypoglycemia were selected for discussion of the incidence of hypoglycemia, significance of hypoglycemia as a marker or cause of poor prognosis, and clinical harm of hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemia was identified in clinical trials as either a category of adverse events or a complication of intensified insulin treatment. For example, a recent meta-analysis found that the incidence of severe hypoglycemia was higher among critically ill patients treated with intensive insulin therapy than among control patients, with a pooled relative risk of 6.0 (95% CI, 4.5–8.0). In the largest multisite RCT on glycemic control among patients in intensive care units (ICUs) conducted to date, deaths were reported for 27.5% (829/3010 patients) in the intensive-treatment group and 24.9% (751/3012 patients) in the conventional-treatment group (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02–1.28; P = 0.02). In another multisite ICU study, although the intensive and control groups had similar mortality rates, the mortality rate was higher among hypoglycemic participants than among nonhypoglycemic participants (32.2% vs 13.6%, respectively; P < 0.01). Pooled data from 2 singlesite studies in medical and surgical ICUs revealed an increased risk of hypoglycemia in the intensive-treatment group compared with the conventional-treatment group (11.3% [154/1360] and 1.8% [25/1388], respectively; P < 0.001), but the hospital mortality rate was similar for the 2 groups (50.6% [78/154] and 52.0% [13/25], respectively). Specific sequelae of hypoglycemia affecting individual patients were described in the RCTs as well as in the observational studies. New guidelines for glycemic control have recently been issued, but results of the studies using the new targets are not yet available. We propose treatment strategies designed to prevent iatrogenic hypoglycemia in the hospital setting.

Conclusions: In response to the growing evidence on the risk of hypoglycemia during intensified glycemic management of hospitalized patients, professional organizations recently revised targets for glycemic control. It is appropriate for institutions to reevaluate hospital protocols for glycemic management with intravenous insulin and, on general wards, to implement standardized order sets for use of subcutaneous insulin to achieve beneficial targets using safe strategies.

医院低血糖:从观察到行动
背景:大量证据表明,当为某些住院人群提供胰岛素治疗高血糖时,达到适当的血糖目标可改善非血糖结局,如死亡率、发病率(如伤口感染、重症多发性神经病变、菌血症、新发肾功能不全)、呼吸机依赖时间、输血需求和住院时间。然而,强化胰岛素治疗的随机对照试验(rct)和实施严格血糖控制前后的结果研究一致认为,低血糖发生率增加是使用低血糖目标和高剂量胰岛素的并发症。目的:这篇评论比较了医源性低血糖临床影响的现有证据的质量。我们提出治疗策略,旨在防止医院环境中的医源性低血糖。方法:检索1986年以来发表的关于低血糖的流行病学、临床影响和危害机制的文章,检索PubMed数据库和发表后追踪的文章在线引文。此外,我们检索了自2001年以来进行的关于医院重症监护环境中强化胰岛素治疗的随机对照试验的文献,包括荟萃分析;给编辑的信不包括在内。对检索到的研究进行扫描,并根据研究的规模和设计、发现的新颖性以及与低血糖可能的临床影响相关的证据选择性地选择全文审查。从检索到的研究中检索参考文献列表以查找其他研究。总结报告的目的是比较和对比医院医源性低血糖信息的定性性质。结果:选取8项强化血糖管理随机对照试验、16项住院低血糖患者观察性研究(包括实施严格血糖控制前后结局的研究)、4例低血糖患者病例报告,探讨低血糖的发生率、低血糖作为不良预后标志或原因的意义、低血糖的临床危害。低血糖在临床试验中被确定为一类不良事件或强化胰岛素治疗的并发症。例如,最近的一项荟萃分析发现,接受强化胰岛素治疗的危重患者的严重低血糖发生率高于对照组,合并相对危险度为6.0 (95% CI, 4.5-8.0)。在迄今为止进行的关于重症监护病房(icu)患者血糖控制的最大的多地点随机对照试验中,重症治疗组的死亡率为27.5%(829/3010例),常规治疗组的死亡率为24.9%(751/3012例)(优势比为1.14;95% ci, 1.02-1.28;P = 0.02)。在另一项多中心ICU研究中,虽然强化组和对照组的死亡率相似,但低血糖组的死亡率高于非低血糖组(分别为32.2%和13.6%;P & lt;0.01)。来自内科和外科icu的2项单点研究的汇总数据显示,与常规治疗组相比,强化治疗组低血糖风险增加(分别为11.3%[154/1360]和1.8% [25/1388]);P & lt;0.001),但两组的医院死亡率相似(分别为50.6%[78/154]和52.0%[13/25])。在随机对照试验和观察性研究中描述了影响个体患者的低血糖的特定后遗症。最近发布了新的血糖控制指南,但使用新目标的研究结果尚未公布。我们提出治疗策略,旨在防止医院环境中的医源性低血糖。结论:鉴于越来越多的证据表明住院患者强化血糖管理过程中存在低血糖风险,专业组织最近修订了血糖控制指标。各机构应重新评估静脉注射胰岛素血糖管理的医院方案,并在普通病房实施标准化的皮下胰岛素使用顺序,以使用安全策略实现有益目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信