↓ Skip to main content

A Comparison of Inpatient Glucose Management Guidelines: Implications for Patient Safety and Quality

Overview of attention for article published in Current Diabetes Reports, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
Title
A Comparison of Inpatient Glucose Management Guidelines: Implications for Patient Safety and Quality
Published in
Current Diabetes Reports, February 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11892-015-0583-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nestoras Mathioudakis, Sherita Hill Golden

Abstract

Inpatient glucose management guidelines and consensus statements play an important role in helping to keep hospitalized patients with diabetes and hyperglycemia safe and in optimizing the quality of their glycemic control. In this review article, we compare and contrast seven prominent US guidelines on recommended glycemic outcome measures and processes of care, with the goal of highlighting how variation among them might influence patient safety and quality. The outcome measures of interest include definitions of glucose abnormalities and glycemic targets. The relevant process measures include detection and documentation of diabetes/hyperglycemia, methods of and indications for insulin therapy, management of non-insulin agents, blood glucose monitoring, management of special situations (e.g., parenteral/enteral nutrition, glucocorticoids, surgery, insulin pumps), and appropriate transitions of care. In addition, we address elements of quality improvement, such as glycemic control program infrastructure, glucometrics, insulin safety, and professional education. While most of these guidelines align with respect to outcome measures such as glycemic targets, there is significant heterogeneity among process measures, which we propose might introduce variation or even confusion in clinical practice and possibly affect quality of care. Guideline-related factors, such as rigor of development, clarity, and presentation, may also affect provider trust in and adherence to guidelines. There is a need for high-quality research to address knowledge gaps in optimal glucose management practice approaches in the hospital setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 99 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 17%
Other 15 15%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 21 21%
Unknown 18 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 23 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 February 2015.
All research outputs
#18,401,176
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#772
of 1,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,240
of 255,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#17
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,006 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 255,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.