Hirshberg Eliotte L, Lanspa Michael J, Wilson Emily L, Sward Katherine A, Jephson Al, Larsen Gitte Y, Morris Alan H
1 Pulmonary and Critical Care Division, Intermountain Medical Center , Murray, Utah.
2 Center for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Medical Center , Murray, Utah.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017 Mar;19(3):188-193. doi: 10.1089/dia.2016.0423. Epub 2017 Mar 1.
Computer clinical decision support (CDS) systems are uncommon in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), despite evidence suggesting they improve outcomes in adult ICUs. We reasoned that a bedside CDS protocol for intravenous insulin titration, eProtocol-insulin, would be feasible and safe in critically ill children.
We retrospectively reviewed data from non-diabetic children admitted to the PICU with blood glucose (BG) ≥140 mg/dL who were managed with intravenous insulin by either unaided clinician titration or eProtocol-insulin. Primary outcomes were BG measurements in target range (80-110 mg/dL) and severe hypoglycemia (BG ≤40 mg/dL); secondary outcomes were 60-day mortality and PICU length of stay. We assessed bedside nurse satisfaction with the eProtocol-insulin protocol by using a 5-point Likert scale and measured clinician compliance with eProtocol-insulin recommendations.
Over 5 years, 69 children were titrated with eProtocol-insulin versus 104 by unaided clinicians. eProtocol-insulin achieved target range more frequently than clinician titration (41% vs. 32%, P < 0.001). Severe hypoglycemia was uncommon in both groups (4.3% of patients in eProtocol-insulin, 8.7% in clinician titration, P = 0.37). There were no differences in mean time to BG target or median BG between the groups. Mortality was 23% in both groups. Clinician compliance with eProtocol-insulin recommendations was 89%. Nurses believed that eProtocol-insulin was easy to understand and safer than clinician titration.
eProtocol-insulin is safe for titration of intravenous insulin in critically ill children. Clinical research protocols and quality improvement initiatives aimed at optimizing BG control should utilize detailed computer protocols that enable replicable clinician decisions.
尽管有证据表明计算机临床决策支持(CDS)系统可改善成人重症监护病房(ICU)的治疗效果,但在儿科重症监护病房(PICU)中并不常见。我们推断,一种用于静脉胰岛素滴定的床边CDS方案——电子方案胰岛素,在危重症儿童中是可行且安全的。
我们回顾性分析了入住PICU且血糖(BG)≥140mg/dL的非糖尿病儿童的数据,这些儿童通过临床医生自主滴定或电子方案胰岛素进行静脉胰岛素治疗。主要结局指标为血糖在目标范围(80 - 110mg/dL)内的测量值和严重低血糖(BG≤40mg/dL);次要结局指标为60天死亡率和PICU住院时间。我们通过5分李克特量表评估床边护士对电子方案胰岛素方案的满意度,并测量临床医生对电子方案胰岛素建议的依从性。
在5年多的时间里,69名儿童采用电子方案胰岛素进行滴定,而104名儿童由临床医生自主滴定。电子方案胰岛素比临床医生滴定更频繁地达到目标范围(41%对32%,P < 0.001)。两组中严重低血糖均不常见(电子方案胰岛素组为4.3%的患者,临床医生滴定组为8.7%,P = 0.37)。两组之间达到血糖目标的平均时间或血糖中位数无差异。两组的死亡率均为23%。临床医生对电子方案胰岛素建议的依从性为89%。护士认为电子方案胰岛素易于理解且比临床医生滴定更安全。
电子方案胰岛素用于危重症儿童静脉胰岛素滴定是安全的。旨在优化血糖控制的临床研究方案和质量改进措施应采用详细的计算机方案,以实现可重复的临床医生决策。