Cargando…
Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload
BACKGROUND: STAR is a model-based, personalised, risk-based dosing approach for glycaemic control (GC) in critically ill patients. STAR provides safe, effective control to nearly all patients, using 1–3 hourly measurement and intervention intervals. However, the average 11–12 measurements per day re...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7191799/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32349750 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-020-00771-6 |
_version_ | 1783527916372492288 |
---|---|
author | Uyttendaele, Vincent Knopp, Jennifer L. Shaw, Geoffrey M. Desaive, Thomas Chase, J. Geoffrey |
author_facet | Uyttendaele, Vincent Knopp, Jennifer L. Shaw, Geoffrey M. Desaive, Thomas Chase, J. Geoffrey |
author_sort | Uyttendaele, Vincent |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: STAR is a model-based, personalised, risk-based dosing approach for glycaemic control (GC) in critically ill patients. STAR provides safe, effective control to nearly all patients, using 1–3 hourly measurement and intervention intervals. However, the average 11–12 measurements per day required can be a clinical burden in many intensive care units. This study aims to significantly reduce workload by extending STAR 1–3 hourly intervals to 1 to 4-, 5-, and 6-hourly intervals, and evaluate the impact of these longer intervals on GC safety and efficacy, using validated in silico virtual patients and trials methods. A Standard STAR approach was used which allowed more hyperglycaemia over extended intervals, and a STAR Upper Limit Controlled approach limited nutrition to mitigate hyperglycaemia over longer intervention intervals. RESULTS: Extending STAR from 1–3 hourly to 1–6 hourly provided high safety and efficacy for nearly all patients in both approaches. For STAR Standard, virtual trial results showed lower % blood glucose (BG) in the safe 4.4–8.0 mmol/L target band (from 83 to 80%) as treatment intervals increased. Longer intervals resulted in increased risks of hyper- (15% to 18% BG > 8.0 mmol/L) and hypo- (2.1% to 2.8% of patients with min. BG < 2.2 mmol/L) glycaemia. These results were achieved with slightly reduced insulin (3.2 [2.0 5.0] to 2.5 [1.5 3.0] U/h) and nutrition (100 [85 100] to 90 [75 100] % goal feed) rates, but most importantly, with significantly reduced workload (12 to 8 measurements per day). The STAR Upper Limit Controlled approach mitigated hyperglycaemia and had lower insulin and significantly lower nutrition administration rates. CONCLUSIONS: The modest increased risk of hyper- and hypo-glycaemia, and the reduction in nutrition delivery associated with longer treatment intervals represent a significant risk and reward trade-off in GC. However, STAR still provided highly safe, effective control for nearly all patients regardless of treatment intervals and approach, showing this unique risk-based dosing approach, modulating both insulin and nutrition, to be robust in its design. Clinical pilot trials using STAR with different measurement timeframes should be undertaken to confirm these results clinically. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7191799 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71917992020-05-04 Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload Uyttendaele, Vincent Knopp, Jennifer L. Shaw, Geoffrey M. Desaive, Thomas Chase, J. Geoffrey Biomed Eng Online Research BACKGROUND: STAR is a model-based, personalised, risk-based dosing approach for glycaemic control (GC) in critically ill patients. STAR provides safe, effective control to nearly all patients, using 1–3 hourly measurement and intervention intervals. However, the average 11–12 measurements per day required can be a clinical burden in many intensive care units. This study aims to significantly reduce workload by extending STAR 1–3 hourly intervals to 1 to 4-, 5-, and 6-hourly intervals, and evaluate the impact of these longer intervals on GC safety and efficacy, using validated in silico virtual patients and trials methods. A Standard STAR approach was used which allowed more hyperglycaemia over extended intervals, and a STAR Upper Limit Controlled approach limited nutrition to mitigate hyperglycaemia over longer intervention intervals. RESULTS: Extending STAR from 1–3 hourly to 1–6 hourly provided high safety and efficacy for nearly all patients in both approaches. For STAR Standard, virtual trial results showed lower % blood glucose (BG) in the safe 4.4–8.0 mmol/L target band (from 83 to 80%) as treatment intervals increased. Longer intervals resulted in increased risks of hyper- (15% to 18% BG > 8.0 mmol/L) and hypo- (2.1% to 2.8% of patients with min. BG < 2.2 mmol/L) glycaemia. These results were achieved with slightly reduced insulin (3.2 [2.0 5.0] to 2.5 [1.5 3.0] U/h) and nutrition (100 [85 100] to 90 [75 100] % goal feed) rates, but most importantly, with significantly reduced workload (12 to 8 measurements per day). The STAR Upper Limit Controlled approach mitigated hyperglycaemia and had lower insulin and significantly lower nutrition administration rates. CONCLUSIONS: The modest increased risk of hyper- and hypo-glycaemia, and the reduction in nutrition delivery associated with longer treatment intervals represent a significant risk and reward trade-off in GC. However, STAR still provided highly safe, effective control for nearly all patients regardless of treatment intervals and approach, showing this unique risk-based dosing approach, modulating both insulin and nutrition, to be robust in its design. Clinical pilot trials using STAR with different measurement timeframes should be undertaken to confirm these results clinically. BioMed Central 2020-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7191799/ /pubmed/32349750 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-020-00771-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Uyttendaele, Vincent Knopp, Jennifer L. Shaw, Geoffrey M. Desaive, Thomas Chase, J. Geoffrey Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload |
title | Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload |
title_full | Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload |
title_fullStr | Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload |
title_full_unstemmed | Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload |
title_short | Risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload |
title_sort | risk and reward: extending stochastic glycaemic control intervals to reduce workload |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7191799/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32349750 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-020-00771-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT uyttendaelevincent riskandrewardextendingstochasticglycaemiccontrolintervalstoreduceworkload AT knoppjenniferl riskandrewardextendingstochasticglycaemiccontrolintervalstoreduceworkload AT shawgeoffreym riskandrewardextendingstochasticglycaemiccontrolintervalstoreduceworkload AT desaivethomas riskandrewardextendingstochasticglycaemiccontrolintervalstoreduceworkload AT chasejgeoffrey riskandrewardextendingstochasticglycaemiccontrolintervalstoreduceworkload |