PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to test whether the mean of the highest and lowest glucose values on day 1 (Glu(1)) is a useful surrogate marker of mean blood glucose during the totality of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (Glu(tot)). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Glu(tot) values were extracted from electronically stored biochemical databases (point-of-care laboratory) and Glu(1) values from electronically stored prospectively collected patient databases in ICUs of 4 hospitals from January 2000 to October 2004. Statistical assessment of relationship between Glu(1) and Glu(tot) was done. RESULTS: There were 197227 blood glucose measurements for 8039 patients. The average of all blood glucose measurements was 8.22 +/- 2.75 mmol/L. The difference between the average of all glucose values (N = 197227) and average of Glu(1) (n = 8039) was 0.17 mmol/L. This difference in each hospital was also small (0.26, -0.13, 0.12, and 0.37 mmol/L, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Glu(1) was a good predictor of Glu(tot) across all study hospitals. This observation makes it possible to use Glu(1) as a surrogate of glucose control during ICU stay and opens the door to understanding ICU glucose control across the whole of Australia and New Zealand.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to test whether the mean of the highest and lowest glucose values on day 1 (Glu(1)) is a useful surrogate marker of mean blood glucose during the totality of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (Glu(tot)). MATERIALS AND METHODS:Glu(tot) values were extracted from electronically stored biochemical databases (point-of-care laboratory) and Glu(1) values from electronically stored prospectively collected patient databases in ICUs of 4 hospitals from January 2000 to October 2004. Statistical assessment of relationship between Glu(1) and Glu(tot) was done. RESULTS: There were 197227 blood glucose measurements for 8039 patients. The average of all blood glucose measurements was 8.22 +/- 2.75 mmol/L. The difference between the average of all glucose values (N = 197227) and average of Glu(1) (n = 8039) was 0.17 mmol/L. This difference in each hospital was also small (0.26, -0.13, 0.12, and 0.37 mmol/L, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Glu(1) was a good predictor of Glu(tot) across all study hospitals. This observation makes it possible to use Glu(1) as a surrogate of glucose control during ICU stay and opens the door to understanding ICU glucose control across the whole of Australia and New Zealand.
Authors: Mark P Plummer; Rinaldo Bellomo; Caroline E Cousins; Christopher E Annink; Krishnaswamy Sundararajan; Benjamin A J Reddi; John P Raj; Marianne J Chapman; Michael Horowitz; Adam M Deane Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Mark P Plummer; Mark E Finnis; Liza K Phillips; Palash Kar; Shailesh Bihari; Vishwanath Biradar; Stewart Moodie; Michael Horowitz; Jonathan E Shaw; Adam M Deane Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Patrick Lecomte; Bruno Van Vlem; Jose Coddens; Guy Cammu; Guy Nollet; Frank Nobels; Hugo Vanermen; Luc Foubert Journal: Crit Care Date: 2008-12-04 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Kirsi-Maija Kaukonen; Michael Bailey; David Pilcher; Neil Orford; Simon Finfer; Rinaldo Bellomo Journal: Crit Care Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 9.097