ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2025
Assessment of Patient Satisfaction Among Patients Treated With Intravenous vs Subcutaneous Insulin for Diabetic Ketoacidosis.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subcutaneous Insulin in Diabetic Ketoacidosis (SQuID): A Nursing-Led Protocol Implementation.Journal of emergency nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: We previously implemented the subcutaneous (SQ) insulin in diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) (SQuID) protocol, demonstrating safe, effective treatment of low to moderate (LTM) severity DKA in a non-intensive care unit setting. SQuID replaces intravenous (IV) insulin with SQ injections and reduces glucose checks from hourly to every 2 hours. We are not aware of any data on patient satisfaction with treatment in DKA. Our objective was to compare satisfaction in patients treated with IV insulin to that in patients treated with the SQ protocol. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study in an urban academic hospital (March 2023 to March 2024) of emergency department patients treated for LTM DKA with SQ or IV insulin. Patients were contacted by phone in the hospital after the resolution of DKA. We used the validated 21-item Diabetic Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire-Inpatient tool (DTSQ-IP) using 7-tier Likert-style options (0 = negative; 6 = positive) to assess patient satisfaction with treatment. We computed the DTSQ-IP composite treatment satisfaction score (using 15 of the 21 items), assessing differences between groups. Results: Of the 60 patients contacted, 52 (87%) completed the questionnaire. Median DTSQ-IP satisfaction scores for SQuID and IV insulin patients were 86.0 (IQR, 79.0, 88.0) and 81.0 (IQR, 77.0, 88.0), respectively. We found no difference in satisfaction between groups (difference 5.0; 95% CI, -3.0, 10.0). Conclusion: In this single-center study, patient satisfaction with DKA care was high, with no differences observed between patients treated with SQ vs IV insulin protocols. This is the first study we are aware of on patient satisfaction with treatment in DKA or treatment with SQ insulin. Though the sample size is small, these findings suggest that patient satisfaction should not represent a barrier to the implementation of SQ protocols for LTM severity DKA.
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.