• M J Schultz, J M Binnekade, R E Harmsen, M J de Graaff, J C Korevaar, F van Braam Houckgeest, J P van der Sluijs, H Kieft, and P E Spronk.
• Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. m.j.schultz@amc.uva.nl
• Neth J Med. 2010 Feb 1;68(2):77-83.

BackgroundTo study current clinical practice in blood glucose (BG) control in adult intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands.MethodsWe performed a national survey focusing on blood glucose targets, insulin administration, BG control guidelines, and opinions regarding BG control aiming for normoglycaemia (known as intensive insulin therapy, IIT).ResultsThe completed questionnaire was returned by 88/113 (78%) of the participating centres. In 98% (86/88) of the ICUs some sort of BG control was being practised. Half of the ICUs (42/86, 48%) used tight BG targets as with IIT; 28/86 (33%) and 13/86 (15%) used more liberal targets of 4.4 to 7.0 mmol/l and 4.4 to 8.0 mmol/l, respectively. Eighty-two (93%) reported having a local guideline on BG control (or IIT). The BG threshold to start insulin was 7.0+/-1.3 mmol/l vs 7.8+/-1.3 mmol/l in ICUs that practised IIT vs ICUs that practised less tight BG control, respectively (p=0.005). In 28/86 (33%) measurement of the BG values was done according to a strict time schedule (i.e., BG values were measured on predefined time points). While respondents were fairly agreed on the benefits of IIT, opinions regarding ease of implementation and time needed to apply this strategy varied. In addition, severe hypoglycaemia was considered a serious side effect of IIT.ConclusionApproximately half of the ICUs in the Netherlands reported having implemented IIT. However, the full guideline as used in the original studies on IIT was hardly ever implemented. Concerns about severe hypoglycaemia, at least in part, hampers implementation of IIT.

25 keywords...

hide…