首页> 外文期刊>Pharmacy >Comparison of Insulin Detemir and Insulin Glargine for Hospitalized Patients on a Basal-Bolus Protocol
【24h】

Comparison of Insulin Detemir and Insulin Glargine for Hospitalized Patients on a Basal-Bolus Protocol

机译:基底静脉曲张治疗住院患者的胰岛素Detemir和甘精胰岛素的比较

获取原文
       

摘要

BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this study is to determine whether insulin detemir is equivalent to insulin glargine in controlling hyperglycemia for the adult hospitalized patient on a basal-bolus treatment regimen. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted at two acute care hospitals within the same health system. Patients from both facilities who were initiated on a basal-bolus subcutaneous insulin regimen were included in the study. The basal-bolus regimen consisted of three components: basal, bolus, and corrective insulin with only the data from the first seven days analyzed. Once the basal-bolus protocol was initiated, all previous glycemic agents were discontinued. The target glycemic goal of the study was 100–180 mg/dL. RESULTS : In both groups, 50% of the patients had achieved the target glycemic control goal (100–180 mg/dL) by day 2 ( p = 0.3). However, on the seventh or last day of basal-bolus treatment, whichever came first, 36.36% of patients receiving insulin detemir ( n = 88) achieved the blood glucose reading goal compared to 52.00% in patients receiving insulin glargine ( n = 100) ( p = 0.03). This corresponded to an adjusted odds ratio of 2.12 (1.08 to 4.15), p = 0.03. The adjusting variables were provider type, whether the patient was hospitalized within 30 days prior and diagnosis of stroke. The mean blood glucose readings for the insulin glargine and the insulin detemir groups while on basal-bolus therapy were 200 mg/dL and 215 mg/dL, respectively ( p = 0.05). The total number of blood glucose readings less than 70 mg/dL and less than 45 mg/dL was very low and there were no differences in number of episodes with hypoglycemia between the two groups. CONCLUSION: There was not a statistical difference between the two groups at 2 days, however there was on the seventh day or the last day of basal-bolus treatment. There were nonsignificant hypoglycemia events between basal insulin groups and the results for the last or seventh day of treatment may not be clinically significant in practice.
机译:背景:这项研究的主要目的是确定在基础推注治疗方案下,成年住院患者在控制高血糖方面,地特胰岛素是否等同于甘精胰岛素。方法:在同一卫生系统内的两家急诊医院进行了回顾性研究。来自这两个机构的患者均在基础推注皮下胰岛素治疗方案下开始治疗。基础推注方案由三个部分组成:基础,推注和矫正胰岛素,仅分析前7天的数据。一旦开始基础推注方案,所有先前的血糖药都将终止。该研究的目标血糖目标是100–180 mg / dL。结果:两组中,有50%的患者在第2天达到了目标血糖控制目标(100-180 mg / dL)(p = 0.3)。但是,在基础推注治疗的第七天或最后一天(以先到者为准),接受胰岛素地特米尔治疗的患者(n = 88)达到36.36%的血糖读数目标,而接受甘精胰岛素治疗的患者(n = 100)达到52.00%的血糖读数目标(p = 0.03)。这对应于调整后的优势比为2.12(1.08至4.15),p = 0.03。调整变量是提供者类型,患者是否在中风之前30天内住院和诊断。在基础推注治疗中,甘精胰岛素和地特胰岛素组的平均血糖读数分别为200 mg / dL和215 mg / dL(p = 0.05)。血糖读数低于70 mg / dL和低于45 mg / dL的总数非常低,两组之间发生低血糖的发作次数没有差异。结论:两组在第2天无统计学差异,但在基础推​​注治疗的第7天或最后一天有统计学差异。基础胰岛素组之间没有发生明显的低血糖事件,治疗的最后一天或第七天的结果在实践中可能并不具有临床意义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号