ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Navigating Clinical Efficacy and Legal Boundaries: Implications of Nurse-Led Glycemic Management in Critical Care.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
- Variability in Intravenous Insulin Infusion Management in Italian Intensive Care Units: A National Cross-Sectional Survey of Reported Nursing Practice.Nursing in critical care · 2026Article
- Perioperative Glycemic Control and Outcomes in Cardiac Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Maintaining optimal blood glucose levels in critically ill patients is a cornerstone of intensive care management. Nurse-led glycemic control protocols, i.e., structured algorithms empowering trained nurses to initiate and adjust insulin therapy, are increasingly adopted to improve the timeliness and consistency of glucose regulation in the Intensive Care Unit. These protocols offer substantial clinical benefits, including faster glucose correction, enhanced adherence to institutional practices, and reduced physician burden. However, their implementation also raises significant legal and ethical concerns. The complexity of critical illness, variability in nursing expertise, and the regulatory boundaries of professional roles may compromise protocol safety and nurse protection if not carefully managed. This paper explores the evidence supporting nurse-led glycemic control, highlighting the risks of both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, and examines institutional strategies to mitigate associated challenges. Recommendations include protocol flexibility, rigorous nurse training, structured escalation pathways, legal endorsement, and integration with electronic health records. When grounded in strong clinical governance and legal frameworks, nurse-led protocols can enhance patient outcomes while preserving professional accountability. However, their success depends on a comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach that balances efficiency with individualized care and safeguards all practitioners involved.
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.