Cargando…

Prediction of Next Glucose Measurement in Hospitalized Patients by Comparing Various Regression Methods: Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitors have shown great promise in improving outpatient blood glucose (BG) control; however, continuous glucose monitors are not routinely used in hospitals, and glucose management is driven by point-of-care (finger stick) and serum glucose measurements in most patie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zale, Andrew D, Abusamaan, Mohammed S, McGready, John, Mathioudakis, Nestoras
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9929733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36719713
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/41577
_version_ 1784888920372150272
author Zale, Andrew D
Abusamaan, Mohammed S
McGready, John
Mathioudakis, Nestoras
author_facet Zale, Andrew D
Abusamaan, Mohammed S
McGready, John
Mathioudakis, Nestoras
author_sort Zale, Andrew D
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitors have shown great promise in improving outpatient blood glucose (BG) control; however, continuous glucose monitors are not routinely used in hospitals, and glucose management is driven by point-of-care (finger stick) and serum glucose measurements in most patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate times series approaches for prediction of inpatient BG using only point-of-care and serum glucose observations. METHODS: Our data set included electronic health record data from 184,320 admissions, from patients who received at least one unit of subcutaneous insulin, had at least 4 BG measurements, and were discharged between January 1, 2015, and May 31, 2019, from 5 Johns Hopkins Health System hospitals. A total of 2,436,228 BG observations were included after excluding measurements obtained in quick succession, from patients who received intravenous insulin, or from critically ill patients. After exclusion criteria, 2.85% (3253/113,976), 32.5% (37,045/113,976), and 1.06% (1207/113,976) of admissions had a coded diagnosis of type 1, type 2, and other diabetes, respectively. The outcome of interest was the predicted value of the next BG measurement (mg/dL). Multiple time series predictors were created and analyzed by comparing those predictors and the index BG measurement (sample-and-hold technique) with next BG measurement. The population was classified by glycemic variability based on the coefficient of variation. To compare the performance of different time series predictors among one another, R(2), root mean squared error, and Clarke Error Grid were calculated and compared with the next BG measurement. All these time series predictors were then used together in Cubist, linear, random forest, partial least squares, and k-nearest neighbor methods. RESULTS: The median number of BG measurements from 113,976 admissions was 12 (IQR 5-24). The R(2) values for the sample-and-hold, 2-hour, 4-hour, 16-hour, and 24-hour moving average were 0.529, 0.504, 0.481, 0.467, and 0.459, respectively. The R(2) values for 4-hour moving average based on glycemic variability were 0.680, 0.480, 0.290, and 0.205 for low, medium, high, and very high glucose variability, respectively. The proportion of BG predictions in zone A of the Clarke Error Grid analysis was 61%, 59%, 27%, and 53% for 4-hour moving average, 24-hour moving average, 3 observation rolling regression, and recursive regression predictors, respectively. In a fully adjusted Cubist, linear, random forest, partial least squares, and k-nearest neighbor model, the R(2) values were 0.563, 0.526, 0.538, and 0.472, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: When analyzing time series predictors independently, increasing variability in a patient’s BG decreased predictive accuracy. Similarly, inclusion of older BG measurements decreased predictive accuracy. These relationships become weaker as glucose variability increases. Machine learning techniques marginally augmented the performance of time series predictors for predicting a patient’s next BG measurement. Further studies should determine the potential of using time series analyses for prediction of inpatient dysglycemia.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9929733
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99297332023-02-16 Prediction of Next Glucose Measurement in Hospitalized Patients by Comparing Various Regression Methods: Retrospective Cohort Study Zale, Andrew D Abusamaan, Mohammed S McGready, John Mathioudakis, Nestoras JMIR Form Res Original Paper BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitors have shown great promise in improving outpatient blood glucose (BG) control; however, continuous glucose monitors are not routinely used in hospitals, and glucose management is driven by point-of-care (finger stick) and serum glucose measurements in most patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate times series approaches for prediction of inpatient BG using only point-of-care and serum glucose observations. METHODS: Our data set included electronic health record data from 184,320 admissions, from patients who received at least one unit of subcutaneous insulin, had at least 4 BG measurements, and were discharged between January 1, 2015, and May 31, 2019, from 5 Johns Hopkins Health System hospitals. A total of 2,436,228 BG observations were included after excluding measurements obtained in quick succession, from patients who received intravenous insulin, or from critically ill patients. After exclusion criteria, 2.85% (3253/113,976), 32.5% (37,045/113,976), and 1.06% (1207/113,976) of admissions had a coded diagnosis of type 1, type 2, and other diabetes, respectively. The outcome of interest was the predicted value of the next BG measurement (mg/dL). Multiple time series predictors were created and analyzed by comparing those predictors and the index BG measurement (sample-and-hold technique) with next BG measurement. The population was classified by glycemic variability based on the coefficient of variation. To compare the performance of different time series predictors among one another, R(2), root mean squared error, and Clarke Error Grid were calculated and compared with the next BG measurement. All these time series predictors were then used together in Cubist, linear, random forest, partial least squares, and k-nearest neighbor methods. RESULTS: The median number of BG measurements from 113,976 admissions was 12 (IQR 5-24). The R(2) values for the sample-and-hold, 2-hour, 4-hour, 16-hour, and 24-hour moving average were 0.529, 0.504, 0.481, 0.467, and 0.459, respectively. The R(2) values for 4-hour moving average based on glycemic variability were 0.680, 0.480, 0.290, and 0.205 for low, medium, high, and very high glucose variability, respectively. The proportion of BG predictions in zone A of the Clarke Error Grid analysis was 61%, 59%, 27%, and 53% for 4-hour moving average, 24-hour moving average, 3 observation rolling regression, and recursive regression predictors, respectively. In a fully adjusted Cubist, linear, random forest, partial least squares, and k-nearest neighbor model, the R(2) values were 0.563, 0.526, 0.538, and 0.472, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: When analyzing time series predictors independently, increasing variability in a patient’s BG decreased predictive accuracy. Similarly, inclusion of older BG measurements decreased predictive accuracy. These relationships become weaker as glucose variability increases. Machine learning techniques marginally augmented the performance of time series predictors for predicting a patient’s next BG measurement. Further studies should determine the potential of using time series analyses for prediction of inpatient dysglycemia. JMIR Publications 2023-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9929733/ /pubmed/36719713 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/41577 Text en ©Andrew D Zale, Mohammed S Abusamaan, John McGready, Nestoras Mathioudakis. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 31.01.2023. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Formative Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://formative.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Zale, Andrew D
Abusamaan, Mohammed S
McGready, John
Mathioudakis, Nestoras
Prediction of Next Glucose Measurement in Hospitalized Patients by Comparing Various Regression Methods: Retrospective Cohort Study
title Prediction of Next Glucose Measurement in Hospitalized Patients by Comparing Various Regression Methods: Retrospective Cohort Study
title_full Prediction of Next Glucose Measurement in Hospitalized Patients by Comparing Various Regression Methods: Retrospective Cohort Study
title_fullStr Prediction of Next Glucose Measurement in Hospitalized Patients by Comparing Various Regression Methods: Retrospective Cohort Study
title_full_unstemmed Prediction of Next Glucose Measurement in Hospitalized Patients by Comparing Various Regression Methods: Retrospective Cohort Study
title_short Prediction of Next Glucose Measurement in Hospitalized Patients by Comparing Various Regression Methods: Retrospective Cohort Study
title_sort prediction of next glucose measurement in hospitalized patients by comparing various regression methods: retrospective cohort study
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9929733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36719713
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/41577
work_keys_str_mv AT zaleandrewd predictionofnextglucosemeasurementinhospitalizedpatientsbycomparingvariousregressionmethodsretrospectivecohortstudy
AT abusamaanmohammeds predictionofnextglucosemeasurementinhospitalizedpatientsbycomparingvariousregressionmethodsretrospectivecohortstudy
AT mcgreadyjohn predictionofnextglucosemeasurementinhospitalizedpatientsbycomparingvariousregressionmethodsretrospectivecohortstudy
AT mathioudakisnestoras predictionofnextglucosemeasurementinhospitalizedpatientsbycomparingvariousregressionmethodsretrospectivecohortstudy