ArticleBMJ open2011
Phase II study of tight glycaemic control in COPD patients with exacerbations admitted to the acute medical unit.
Article in BMJ open, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00764556 (Phase II Study of Safety and Feasibility of Intensive Blood Glucose Control With Insulin on Acute Medical Wards), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Phase II Study of Safety and Feasibility of Intensive Blood Glucose Control With Insulin on Acute Medical Wards
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hyperglycemia control of the nil per os patient in the intensive care unit: introduction of a simple subcutaneous insulin algorithm.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2012Trial
- The benefits of tight glycemic control in critical illness: Sweeter than assumed?Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHyperglycaemia is associated with poor outcomes from exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Glycaemic control could improve outcomes by reducing infection, inflammation and myopathy. Most patients with COPD are managed on the acute medical unit (AMU) outside intensive care (ICU).
objectiveTo determine the feasibility, safety and efficacy of tight glycaemic control in patients on an AMU.
designProspective, non-randomised, phase II, single-arm study of tight glycaemic control in COPD patients with acute exacerbations and hyperglycaemia admitted to the AMU. Participants received intravenous, then subcutaneous, insulin to control blood glucose to 4.4-6.5 mmol/l. Tight glycaemic control was evaluated: feasibility, protocol adherence; acceptability, patient questionnaire; safety, frequency of hypoglycaemia (capillary blood glucose (CBG) <2.2 mmol/l and 2.2-3.3 mmol/l); efficacy, median CBG, fasting CBG, proportion of measurements/time in target range, glycaemic variability.
resultswere compared with 25 published ICU studies. Results 20 patients (10 females, age 71 ± 9 years; forced expiratory volume in 1 s: 41 ± 16% predicted) were recruited. Tight glycaemic control was feasible (78% CBG measurements and 89% of insulin-dose adjustments were adherent to protocol) and acceptable to patients. 0.2% CBG measurements were <2.2 mmol/l and 4.1% measurements 2.2-3.3 mmol/l. The study CBG and proportion of measurements/time in target range were similar to that of ICU studies, whereas the fasting CBG was lower, and the glycaemic variability was greater.
conclusionsTight glycaemic control is feasible and has similar safety and efficacy on AMU to ICU. However, as more recent ICU studies have shown no benefit and possible harm from tight glycaemic control, alternative strategies for blood glucose control in COPD exacerbations should now be explored. Trial registration number ISRCTN: 42412334. http://Clinical.Trials.gov NCT00764556.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.