Cargando…

Effect of informatization-based blood glucose team management on the control of hyperglycaemia in noncritical care units

PURPOSE: To provide a new system of in-hospital blood glucose team management combined with a network blood glucose monitoring system and analyse the effect on hyperglycaemic participants’ blood glucose control in noncritical care units. METHODS: Hyperglycaemic participants in noncritical care units...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Ying, Yang, Yan, Yang, Miao, Xia, Wei, Zhou, Hui, Zhu, Xian-Jun, Tang, Nie, Li, Peng-Qiu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7065766/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32160260
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230115
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To provide a new system of in-hospital blood glucose team management combined with a network blood glucose monitoring system and analyse the effect on hyperglycaemic participants’ blood glucose control in noncritical care units. METHODS: Hyperglycaemic participants in noncritical care units were divided into two groups. They underwent active intervention by the hospital’s blood glucose management team or the routine consultation group. The better method, based on a shorter length of stay (LOS) and lower hospital cost, could be selected by comparing the two blood glucose management strategies. RESULTS: Compared with the routine consultation group, the team management group had a higher detection rate of hyperglycaemia (18.49% vs 16.17%, P<0.01) and glycosylated haemoglobin (51.53% vs 30.97%, P<0.01) and a lower incidence rate of hyperglycaemia (59.24% vs 61.59%, P<0.01), severe hyperglycaemia (3.56% vs 5.19%, P<0.01) and clinically significant hypoglycaemia (0.26% vs 0.35%, P<0.05). Simultaneously, blood glucose drift (mmol/L) (2.50 (1.83, 3.25) vs 2.76 (2.01, 3.57), P<0.01), blood glucose coefficient of variation (%) (28.86 (22.70, 34.83) vs 29.80 (23.47, 36.13), P<0.01), maximum blood glucose fluctuation (mmol/L) (9.30 (6.20, 13.10) vs 10.10 (7.00, 14.40), P<0.01) and nosocomial infection (5.42% vs 8.05%, P<0.05) were all lower among participants in the team management group. In addition, the LOS (P<0.001) and hospital costs (P<0.001) of participants were lower in the team management group. CONCLUSION: In-hospital blood glucose team management combined with a network blood glucose monitoring system effectively improved the blood glucose control and fluctuation levels of participants who were admitted to noncritical care units, thereby reducing LOS and hospital cost.