Cargando…

Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND: The changes in metabolic pathways and metabolites due to critical illness result in a highly complex and dynamic metabolic state, making safe, effective management of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia difficult. In addition, clinical practices can vary significantly, thus making GC protocol...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stewart, Kent W., Pretty, Christopher G., Tomlinson, Hamish, Thomas, Felicity L., Homlok, József, Noémi, Szabó Némedi, Illyés, Attila, Shaw, Geoffrey M., Benyó, Balázs, Chase, J. Geoffrey
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Paris 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4811843/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27025951
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13613-016-0125-9
_version_ 1782424027599470592
author Stewart, Kent W.
Pretty, Christopher G.
Tomlinson, Hamish
Thomas, Felicity L.
Homlok, József
Noémi, Szabó Némedi
Illyés, Attila
Shaw, Geoffrey M.
Benyó, Balázs
Chase, J. Geoffrey
author_facet Stewart, Kent W.
Pretty, Christopher G.
Tomlinson, Hamish
Thomas, Felicity L.
Homlok, József
Noémi, Szabó Némedi
Illyés, Attila
Shaw, Geoffrey M.
Benyó, Balázs
Chase, J. Geoffrey
author_sort Stewart, Kent W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The changes in metabolic pathways and metabolites due to critical illness result in a highly complex and dynamic metabolic state, making safe, effective management of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia difficult. In addition, clinical practices can vary significantly, thus making GC protocols difficult to generalize across units.The aim of this study was to provide a retrospective analysis of the safety, performance and workload of the stochastic targeted (STAR) glycemic control (GC) protocol to demonstrate that patient-specific, safe, effective GC is possible with the STAR protocol and that it is also generalizable across/over different units and clinical practices. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of STAR GC in the Christchurch Hospital Intensive Care Unit (ICU), New Zealand (267 patients), and the Gyula Hospital, Hungary (47 patients), is analyzed (2011–2015). STAR Christchurch (BG target 4.4–8.0 mmol/L) is also compared to the Specialized Relative Insulin and Nutrition Tables (SPRINT) protocol (BG target 4.4–6.1 mmol/L) implemented in the Christchurch Hospital ICU, New Zealand (292 patients, 2005–2007). Cohort mortality, effectiveness and safety of glycemic control and nutrition delivered are compared using nonparametric statistics. RESULTS: Both STAR implementations and SPRINT resulted in over 86 % of time per episode in the blood glucose (BG) band of 4.4–8.0 mmol/L. Patients treated using STAR in Christchurch ICU spent 36.7 % less time on protocol and were fed significantly more than those treated with SPRINT (73 vs. 86 % of caloric target). The results from STAR in both Christchurch and Gyula were very similar, with the BG distributions being almost identical. STAR provided safe GC with very few patients experiencing severe hypoglycemia (BG < 2.2 mmol/L, <5 patients, 1.5 %). CONCLUSIONS: STAR outperformed its predecessor, SPRINT, by providing higher nutrition and equally safe, effective control for all the days of patient stay, while lowering the number of measurements and interventions required. The STAR protocol has the ability to deliver high performance and high safety across patient types, time, clinical practice culture (Christchurch and Gyula) and clinical resources.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4811843
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Paris
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48118432016-04-10 Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis Stewart, Kent W. Pretty, Christopher G. Tomlinson, Hamish Thomas, Felicity L. Homlok, József Noémi, Szabó Némedi Illyés, Attila Shaw, Geoffrey M. Benyó, Balázs Chase, J. Geoffrey Ann Intensive Care Research BACKGROUND: The changes in metabolic pathways and metabolites due to critical illness result in a highly complex and dynamic metabolic state, making safe, effective management of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia difficult. In addition, clinical practices can vary significantly, thus making GC protocols difficult to generalize across units.The aim of this study was to provide a retrospective analysis of the safety, performance and workload of the stochastic targeted (STAR) glycemic control (GC) protocol to demonstrate that patient-specific, safe, effective GC is possible with the STAR protocol and that it is also generalizable across/over different units and clinical practices. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of STAR GC in the Christchurch Hospital Intensive Care Unit (ICU), New Zealand (267 patients), and the Gyula Hospital, Hungary (47 patients), is analyzed (2011–2015). STAR Christchurch (BG target 4.4–8.0 mmol/L) is also compared to the Specialized Relative Insulin and Nutrition Tables (SPRINT) protocol (BG target 4.4–6.1 mmol/L) implemented in the Christchurch Hospital ICU, New Zealand (292 patients, 2005–2007). Cohort mortality, effectiveness and safety of glycemic control and nutrition delivered are compared using nonparametric statistics. RESULTS: Both STAR implementations and SPRINT resulted in over 86 % of time per episode in the blood glucose (BG) band of 4.4–8.0 mmol/L. Patients treated using STAR in Christchurch ICU spent 36.7 % less time on protocol and were fed significantly more than those treated with SPRINT (73 vs. 86 % of caloric target). The results from STAR in both Christchurch and Gyula were very similar, with the BG distributions being almost identical. STAR provided safe GC with very few patients experiencing severe hypoglycemia (BG < 2.2 mmol/L, <5 patients, 1.5 %). CONCLUSIONS: STAR outperformed its predecessor, SPRINT, by providing higher nutrition and equally safe, effective control for all the days of patient stay, while lowering the number of measurements and interventions required. The STAR protocol has the ability to deliver high performance and high safety across patient types, time, clinical practice culture (Christchurch and Gyula) and clinical resources. Springer Paris 2016-03-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4811843/ /pubmed/27025951 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13613-016-0125-9 Text en © Stewart et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research
Stewart, Kent W.
Pretty, Christopher G.
Tomlinson, Hamish
Thomas, Felicity L.
Homlok, József
Noémi, Szabó Némedi
Illyés, Attila
Shaw, Geoffrey M.
Benyó, Balázs
Chase, J. Geoffrey
Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis
title Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis
title_full Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis
title_fullStr Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis
title_full_unstemmed Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis
title_short Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis
title_sort safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the star protocol: a retrospective analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4811843/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27025951
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13613-016-0125-9
work_keys_str_mv AT stewartkentw safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT prettychristopherg safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT tomlinsonhamish safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT thomasfelicityl safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT homlokjozsef safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT noemiszabonemedi safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT illyesattila safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT shawgeoffreym safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT benyobalazs safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis
AT chasejgeoffrey safetyefficacyandclinicalgeneralizationofthestarprotocolaretrospectiveanalysis