Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 21, 2026
Improving IV Insulin Administration in a Community Hospital
Published on: June 11, 2012
A randomized controlled trial comparing a computer-assisted insulin infusion protocol with a strict and a
Alexandre B Cavalcanti1, Eliezer Silva, Adriano J Pereira
1Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo 05652-000, Brazil. alexandrebiasi@hotmail.com
Purpose:
The objective of this study is to evaluate blood glucose (BG) control efficacy and safety of 3 insulin protocols in medical intensive care unit (MICU) patients.
Methods:
This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial involving 167 MICU patients with at least one BG measurement >or=150 mg/dL and one or more of the following: mechanical ventilation, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, trauma, or burns. The interventions were computer-assisted insulin protocol (CAIP), with insulin infusion maintaining BG between 100 and 130 mg/dL; Leuven protocol, with insulin maintaining BG between 80 and 110 mg/dL; or conventional treatment-subcutaneous insulin if glucose >150 mg/dL. The main efficacy outcome was the mean of patients' median BG, and the safety outcome was the incidence of hypoglycemia (
Results:
The mean of patients' median BG was 125.0, 127.1, and 158.5 mg/dL for CAIP, Leuven, and conventional treatment, respectively (P = .34, CAIP vs Leuven; P < .001, CAIP vs conventional). In CAIP, 12 patients (21.4%) had at least one episode of hypoglycemia vs 24 (41.4%) in Leuven and 2 (3.8%) in conventional treatment (P = .02, CAIP vs Leuven; P = .006, CAIP vs conventional).
Conclusions:
The CAIP is safer than and as effective as the standard strict protocol for controlling glucose in MICU patients. Hypoglycemia was rare under conventional treatment. However, BG levels were higher than with IV insulin protocols.
