ArticleJMIR research protocols2018
Outcome of Critically ill Patients Undergoing Mandatory Insulin Therapy Compared to Usual Care Insulin Therapy: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unpacking Prevalence and Dichotomy in Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Parameters: Observational Data-Driven Approach Backed by Sepsis Pathophysiology.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Fluid Administration in Emergency Room Limited by Lung Ultrasound in Patients with Sepsis: Protocol for a Prospective Phase II Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObservational and interventional studies in patients with both acute medical conditions and long-standing diabetes have shown that improved blood glucose control confers a survival advantage or reduces complication rates. Policies of "tight" glycaemic control were rapidly adopted by many general intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide in the mid 00's, even though the results of the studies were not generalizable to mixed medical/surgical ICUs with different intravenous feeding policies.
objectiveThe primary objective of the study is to assess the safety of mandatory insulin infusion in critically ill patients in a general ICU setting.
methodsThis protocol summarizes the rationale and design of a randomized, controlled, single-center trial investigating the effect of mandatory insulin therapy versus usual care insulin therapy for those patients admitted for a stay of longer than 48 hours. In total, 109 critically ill adults predicted to stay in intensive care for longer than 48 hours consented. The primary outcome is to determine the safety of mandatory insulin therapy in critically ill patients using the number of episodes of hypoglycaemia and hypokalaemia per unit length of stay in intensive care. Secondary outcomes include the duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of ICU and hospital stay, hospital mortality, and measures of renal, hepatic, and haematological dysfunction.
resultsThe project was funded in 2005 and enrolment was completed 2007. Data analysis is currently underway and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in 2018.
conclusionsThis protocol for a randomized controlled trial investigating the effect of mandatory insulin therapy should provide an answer to a key question for the management of patients in the ICU and ultimately improving outcome.
trial registrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN00550641; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN00550641 (Archived at WebCite: http://www.webcitation.org/6xk8NXxNv).
Indexed as
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.