Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Nutrition delivery, workload and performance in a model-based ICU glycaemic control system.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Hyperglycaemia is commonplace in the adult intensive care unit (ICU), and has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Effective glycaemic control (GC) can reduce morbidity and mortality, but has proven difficult. STAR is a model-based GC protocol that uniquely maintains normoglycaemia by changing both insulin and nutrition interventions, and has been proven effective in controlling blood glucose (BG) in the ICU. However, most ICU GC protocols only change insulin interventions, making the variable nutrition aspect of STAR less clinically desirable. This paper compares the performance of STAR modulating only insulin, with three simpler alternative nutrition protocols in clinically evaluated virtual trials.

METHODS: Alternative nutrition protocols are fixed nutrition rate (100% caloric goal), CB (Cahill et al. best) stepped nutrition rate (60%, 80% and 100% caloric goal for the first 3 days of GC, and 100% thereafter) and SLQ (STAR lower quartile) stepped nutrition rate (65%, 75% and 85% caloric goal for the first 3 days of GC, and 85% thereafter). Each nutrition protocol is simulated with the STAR insulin protocol on a 221 patient virtual cohort, and GC performance, safety and total intervention workload are assessed.

RESULTS: All alternative nutrition protocols considerably reduced total intervention workload (14.6-19.8%) due to reduced numbers of nutrition changes. However, only the stepped nutrition protocols achieved similar GC performance to the current variable nutrition protocol. Of the two stepped nutrition protocols, the SLQ nutrition protocol also improved GC safety, almost halving the number of severe hypoglycaemic cases (5 vs. 9, P = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the SLQ nutrition protocol was the best alternative to the current variable nutrition protocol, but either stepped nutrition protocol could be adapted by STAR to reduce workload and make it more clinically acceptable, while maintaining its proven performance and safety.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app