| Title |
Remote Monitoring and Consultation of Inpatient Populations with Diabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Diabetes Reports, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11892-017-0896-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert J. Rushakoff, Joshua A. Rushakoff, Zachary Kornberg, Heidemarie Windham MacMaster, Arti D. Shah |
| Abstract |
Inpatient hyperglycemia is common and is linked to increased morbidity and mortality. We review current and innovative ways diabetes specialists consult in the management of inpatient diabetes. With electronic medical records (EMRs), remote monitoring and intervention may improve the management of inpatient hyperglycemia. Automated reports allow monitoring of glucose levels and allow diabetes teams to intervene through formal or remote consultation. Following a 2-year transition of our complex paper-based insulin order sets to be EMR based, we leveraged this change by developing new daily glycemic reports and a virtual glucose management service (vGMS). Based on a daily report identifying patients with two or more glucoses over 225 mg/dl and/or a glucose <70 mg/dl in the past 24 h, a vGMS note with management recommendations was placed in the chart. Following the introduction of the vGMS, the proportion of hyperglycemic patients decreased 39% from a baseline of 6.5 per 100 patient-days to 4.0 per 100 patient-days The hypoglycemia proportion decreased by 36%. Ninety-nine percent of surveyed medical and surgical residents said the vGMS was both important and helpful. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Researcher | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 15 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 May 2019.
All research outputs
#5,742,093
of 23,905,714 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#284
of 1,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,902
of 317,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#5
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,905,714 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,026 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,455 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.