Cited by 329Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patientsDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and Management

Management of diabetes and hyperglycaemia in the hospital

Open access
Pasquel, Francisco J, Lansang, M Cecilia, Dhatariya, Ketan, Umpierrez, Guillermo E·2021·The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology

Abstract

Hyperglycaemia in people with and without diabetes admitted to the hospital is associated with a substantial increase in morbidity, mortality, and health-care costs. Professional societies have recommended insulin therapy as the cornerstone of inpatient pharmacological management. Intravenous insulin therapy is the treatment of choice in the critical care setting. In non-intensive care settings, several insulin protocols have been proposed to manage patients with hyperglycaemia; however, meta-analyses comparing different treatment regimens have not clearly endorsed the benefits of any particular strategy. Clinical guidelines recommend stopping oral antidiabetes drugs during hospitalisation; however, in some countries continuation of oral antidiabetes drugs is commonplace in some patients with type 2 diabetes admitted to hospital, and findings from clinical trials have suggested that non-insulin drugs, alone or in combination with basal insulin, can be used to achieve appropriate glycaemic control in selected populations. Advances in diabetes technology are revolutionising day-to-day diabetes care and work is ongoing to implement these technologies (ie, continuous glucose monitoring, automated insulin delivery) for inpatient care. Additionally, transformations in care have occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the use of remote inpatient diabetes management-research is needed to assess the effects of such adaptations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2213-8587(20)30381-8

Cites

142 of 142 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Meta-analyses of RCTs found a 6 to 7.7 times higher risk ratio for hypoglycemia with intensive insulin therapy versus conventional glycemic control in critically ill patients, and some studies found a risk ratio above 10.

    “Meta-analyses of RCTs have reported increased risk ratio of 6 to 7.7 times for occurrence of hypoglycemia with intensive insulin therapy vs conventional glycemic control in critically ill persons,1259,1361 with some studies showing a risk ratio >10.1259”

    From American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update. (2022) · cites this paper as [1259]

    The “Diagnostic criteria and glycaemic targets” and “Insulin therapy and hypoglycaemia” sections report increased hypoglycaemia risk with intensive glucose targets in critically ill patients. They do not report meta-analytic risk ratios of 6–7.7 or study estimates above 10 for intensive versus conventional control. The numerical estimates given instead compare basal–bolus with sliding-scale insulin; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pasquel, F. J., Lansang, M. C., Dhatariya, K., & Umpierrez, G. E.
Affiliations
  • Emory University (US)
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
  • Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Pasquel, Francisco J
Venue
The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-03
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
174-188
ISSN
2213-8587 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3123418238
Cited by
329
References
142
Citations by year
2026: 53 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 20
FWCI
7.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (K23GM128221-03, P30DK111024-05S1, UL1TR002378-04)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
hyperglycemia, insulin therapy, intravenous insulin, intensive care, type 2 diabetes, basal insulin, continuous glucose monitoring, artificial pancreas, COVID-19 pandemic, glycemic control
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Hospitalization, Humans, Hyperglycemia, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Disease Management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review