| Title |
Inpatient Glycemic Management in the Setting of Renal Insufficiency/Failure/Dialysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Diabetes Reports, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11892-018-1044-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ravi Iyengar, Jennifer Franzese, Roma Gianchandani |
| Abstract |
Chronic diabetic nephropathy and renal dysfunction from other causes are common in hospitalized patients with diabetes. Available diabetes management guidelines aim to reduce hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, both independent risk factors for hospital outcomes. Renal dysfunction, which increases the risk of hypoglycemia, adds a layer of complexity in diabetes management. Therefore, modified glucose goals and treatment regimens may be required. Recent prospective and retrospective studies provide direction on safe insulin therapy for diabetes inpatients with renal compromise. Studies of newer diabetes pharmacotherapy provide data on oral agent use in the inpatient setting. Diabetes therapy should be modified with changing renal function. Glucose management in patients on peritoneal or hemodialysis is challenging. Reducing weight-based doses of insulin and use of newer insulins can reduce hypoglycemia risk. Safety and efficacy of DPP-4 inhibitors has been evaluated in the hospital and nursing home setting. Metformin, SGLT-2 inhibitors, and GLP1 receptor agonists can be used in several stages of renal dysfunction prior to and at discharge. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 States | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#13,625,040
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#563
of 1,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,290
of 330,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#26
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 330,638 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.