Cited by 103Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Treatment and Management

Guidelines for insulin dosing in continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion using new formulas from a retrospective study of individuals with optimal glucose levels

Open access
Walsh, John, Roberts, Ruth, Bailey, Timothy·2010·Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Successful insulin pump therapy depends on correct insulin doses based on an optimal total daily dose (TDD) and optimal pump settings for basal infusion, carbohydrate factor (CarbF), and glucose correction factor (CorrF) based on the TDD. There are limited data in the literature to guide providers and patients regarding methods to optimize these critical parameters for glucose control. METHODS: Anonymous data downloads from 1020 insulin pumps used throughout the United States and overseen by a variety of clinicians were analyzed retrospectively to find insulin doses that provided the best glucose control. A subset of 396 pumps was chosen for glucose data reliability, with over 85% of their glucose data directly entered from a meter. This subset was divided into tertiles based on glucose levels, and the low glucose tertile was analyzed to derive formulas for optimal insulin pump settings. RESULTS: An inconsistent clustering of pump settings was found for the CarbF and the CorrF. This was less pronounced when CarbFs and CorrFs were determined from the actual bolus doses delivered once adjustments were made to the initial dose calculations by users and, to a larger extent, internally by the bolus calculator itself. Common beliefs that hyperglycemia is related to less carb counting, fewer carb boluses, or delivery of less insulin per day were not substantiated in this data. New or verified insulin dosing formulas presented include basal U/day = TDD × 0.48; CarbF = [2.6 × Wt(lb)]/TDD; and CorrF = 1960/TDD. CONCLUSIONS: Insulin pump users cannot reap full benefit from their pump bolus calculator if the settings on which bolus doses are based are less than optimal. Our data show that CarbFs and CorrFs tend to be unevenly distributed, suggesting that these factors are not selected in a systematic manner through use of formulas. Poor glucose outcomes among insulin pump users appear to be related to pump setting errors and being relatively underinsulinized, even though those in poor control use more total insulin per day. We have developed a model with the hypothesis that improved glucose outcomes will result from the use of formulas to derive appropriate pump settings. Prospective validation of these concepts is needed.

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 · 10.1177/193229681000400516

Cites

3 of 3 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Walsh J, Roberts R. Pumping insulin. 2nd ed. San Diego: Torrey Pines Press; 1994.
  2. Davidson PC, Hebblewhite HR, Bode BW, Steed RD, Welch NS, Greenlee MC, Richardson PL, Johnson J. Statistically based CSII parameters: correction factor, CF (1700 rule), carbohydrate-to- insulin ratio, CIR (2.8 rule), and basal-to-total ratio. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2003;3:237.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Walsh, J., Roberts, R., & Bailey, T.
Affiliations
  • AMCR Institute (US)
  • Diabetes Services, Inc., San Diego, California
Corresponding author
Walsh, John
Venue
Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology
Published
2010-09
Volume
4
Issue
5
Pages
1174-1181
ISSN
1932-2968 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2155234512
Cited by
103
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
insulin pump therapy, total daily dose, basal insulin rate, bolus calculator, glycemic control
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Data Collection, Diabetes Mellitus, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Injections, Subcutaneous, Insulin, Insulin Infusion Systems, Models, Biological, Retrospective Studies, Normal Distribution, Treatment Outcome, Guidelines as Topic

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