Suppr超能文献

糖尿病酮症酸中毒皮下胰岛素治疗(SQuID)II:临床及操作有效性

SQuID (subcutaneous insulin in diabetic ketoacidosis) II: Clinical and operational effectiveness.

作者信息

Griffey Richard T, Schneider Ryan M, Girardi Margo, LaRossa Gina, Yeary Julianne, Lehmkuhl Michael, Frawley Laura, Ancona Rachel, Kaser Taylor, Suarez Dan, Cruz-Bravo Paulina

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.

Department of Medicine, Division of Hospital Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.

出版信息

Acad Emerg Med. 2025 Jan;32(1):61-71. doi: 10.1111/acem.15020. Epub 2024 Sep 23.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We previously demonstrated safe treatment of low- to moderate-severity (LTM) diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) using the SQuID protocol (subcutaneous insulin in DKA) in a non-intensive care unit (ICU) observation setting, with decreased emergency department length of stay (EDLOS). Here, we expand eligibility to include sicker patients and admission to a regular medical floor and collected more detailed clinical data in a near-real-time fashion.

METHODS

This is a real-world, prospective, observational cohort study in an urban academic hospital (March 4, 2023-March 4, 2024). LTM DKA patients were treated with IV insulin (floor or ICU) or on SQuID. We compare fidelity (time to glargine and dextrose-containing fluids), safety (rescue dextrose for hypoglycemia), effectiveness (time to anion gap closure, time on protocol), and operational efficiency (time to bed request, EDLOS, and ICU admission rate since implementation of the protocol).

RESULTS

Of 84 patients with LTM DKA, 62 (74%) of were treated with SQuID and 22 (26%) with IV insulin. Fidelity was high in both groups. Rescue dextrose was required in five (8%) versus four (18%) patients, respectively (difference 9%, -31% to 10%). Compared to the IV insulin group, time to anion gap was 1.4 h shorter (95% CI -3.4 to 0.2 h) and time on protocol was 10.4 h shorter (95% CI -22.3 to -5.0 h) in SQuID patients. Median EDLOS was lower in the SQuID cohort 9.8 h (IQR 6.0-13.6) than the IV floor cohort 18.3 h (IQR 13.4-22.0 h), but longer than the overall IV insulin cohort. Since inception of SQuID, ICU admission rate in LTM DKA has decreased from 54% to under 21%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-center study, we observed excellent fidelity, equivalent or superior safety, and clinical and operational effectiveness with SQuID compared to IV insulin. The SQuID protocol has become the de facto default pathway for treatment of LTM DKA. Since inception of SQuID, ICU admissions in LTM DKA have decreased 33%.

摘要

目的

我们之前在非重症监护病房(ICU)观察环境中,使用SQuID方案(糖尿病酮症酸中毒皮下胰岛素治疗)证明了对低至中度严重程度(LTM)的糖尿病酮症酸中毒(DKA)进行安全治疗,可缩短急诊科住院时间(EDLOS)。在此,我们扩大了纳入标准,以纳入病情更重的患者并允许入住普通内科病房,并以近乎实时的方式收集了更详细的临床数据。

方法

这是一项在城市学术医院进行的真实世界、前瞻性观察队列研究(2023年3月4日至2024年3月4日)。LTM DKA患者接受静脉胰岛素治疗(普通病房或ICU)或SQuID方案治疗。我们比较了依从性(甘精胰岛素和含葡萄糖液体的使用时间)、安全性(低血糖时静脉推注葡萄糖)、有效性(阴离子间隙纠正时间、方案治疗时间)和运营效率(申请床位时间、EDLOS以及自该方案实施以来的ICU入住率)。

结果

84例LTM DKA患者中,62例(74%)接受SQuID方案治疗,22例(26%)接受静脉胰岛素治疗。两组的依从性都很高。分别有5例(8%)和4例(18%)患者需要静脉推注葡萄糖(差异为9%,-31%至10%)。与静脉胰岛素组相比,SQuID方案治疗的患者阴离子间隙纠正时间缩短1.4小时(95%CI -3.4至0.2小时),方案治疗时间缩短10.4小时(95%CI -22.3至-5.0小时)。SQuID队列的EDLOS中位数为9.8小时(IQR 6.0 - 13.6),低于静脉胰岛素普通病房队列的18.3小时(IQR 13.4 - 22.0小时),但长于总体静脉胰岛素队列。自SQuID方案实施以来,LTM DKA患者的ICU入住率已从54%降至21%以下。

结论

在这项单中心研究中,我们观察到与静脉胰岛素相比,SQuID方案具有出色的依从性、相当或更高的安全性以及临床和运营有效性。SQuID方案已成为治疗LTM DKA的实际默认途径。自SQuID方案实施以来,LTM DKA患者的ICU入住率下降了33%。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验