首页> 外文OA文献 >Clinical review: Strict or loose glycemic control in critically ill patients - implementing best available evidence from randomized controlled trials
【2h】

Clinical review: Strict or loose glycemic control in critically ill patients - implementing best available evidence from randomized controlled trials

机译:临床评论:重症患者的严格或宽松的血糖控制-实施随机对照试验中可获得的最佳证据

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Glycemic control aiming at normoglycemia, frequently referred to as 'strict glycemic control' (SGC), decreased mortality and morbidity of adult critically ill patients in two randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Five successive RCTs, however, failed to show benefit of SGC with one trial even reporting an unexpected higher mortality. Consequently, enthusiasm for the implementation of SGC has declined, hampering translation of SGC into daily ICU practice. In this manuscript we attempt to explain the variances in outcomes of the RCTs of SGC, and point out other limitations of the current literature on glycemic control in ICU patients. There are several alternative explanations for why the five negative RCTs showed no beneficial effects of SGC, apart from the possibility that SGC may indeed not benefit ICU patients. These include, but are not restricted to, variability in the performance of SGC, differences among trial designs, changes in standard of care, differences in timing (that is, initiation) of SGC, and the convergence between the intervention groups and control groups with respect to achieved blood glucose levels in the successive RCTs. Additional factors that may hamper translation of SGC into daily ICU practice include the feared risk of severe hypoglycemia, additional labor associated with SGC, and uncertainties about who the primarily responsible caregiver should be for the implementation of SGC.
机译:在两项随机对照试验(RCT)中,针对血糖正常的血糖控制(通常称为“严格血糖控制”(SGC))降低了成人危重患者的死亡率和发病率。然而,五项连续的RCT未能显示出SGC的益处,一项试验甚至报告了出乎意料的更高死亡率。因此,执行SGC的热情下降了,从而阻碍了SGC转换为日常ICU的实践。在本手稿中,我们试图解释SGC的RCT结果的差异,并指出当前有关ICU患者血糖控制文献的其他限制。除了SGC确实不能使ICU患者受益的可能性外,还有五个关于为什么五个阴性RCT没有显示SGC有益效果的替代解释。这些包括但不限于SGC的性能差异,试验设计之间的差异,护理标准的变化,SGC的时机(即开始)的差异以及干预组和对照组之间的趋同。连续RCT中达到的血糖水平。可能会阻碍SGC转换为ICU日常操作的其他因素包括担心的严重低血糖风险,与SGC相关的额外劳动以及不确定谁应由谁来负责SGC的主要护理人员。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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