Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 23, 2026

Remotely Supervised Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: An Update on Safety and Tolerability
Published on: October 7, 2017
Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis
Kent W Stewart1, Christopher G Pretty2, Hamish Tomlinson2
1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Centre for Bio-Engineering, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand. kent.stewart@pg.canterbury.ac.nz.
Background:
The changes in metabolic pathways and metabolites due to critical illness result in a highly complex and dynamic metabolic state, making safe, effective management of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia difficult. In addition, clinical practices can vary significantly, thus making GC protocols difficult to generalize across units.The aim of this study was to provide a retrospective analysis of the safety, performance and workload of the stochastic targeted (STAR) glycemic control (GC) protocol to demonstrate that patient-specific, safe, effective GC is possible with the STAR protocol and that it is also generalizable across/over different units and clinical practices.
Methods:
Retrospective analysis of STAR GC in the Christchurch Hospital Intensive Care Unit (ICU), New Zealand (267 patients), and the Gyula Hospital, Hungary (47 patients), is analyzed (2011-2015). STAR Christchurch (BG target 4.4-8.0 mmol/L) is also compared to the Specialized Relative Insulin and Nutrition Tables (SPRINT) protocol (BG target 4.4-6.1 mmol/L) implemented in the Christchurch Hospital ICU, New Zealand (292 patients, 2005-2007). Cohort mortality, effectiveness and safety of glycemic control and nutrition delivered are compared using nonparametric statistics.
Results:
Both STAR implementations and SPRINT resulted in over 86 % of time per episode in the blood glucose (BG) band of 4.4-8.0 mmol/L. Patients treated using STAR in Christchurch ICU spent 36.7 % less time on protocol and were fed significantly more than those treated with SPRINT (73 vs. 86 % of caloric target). The results from STAR in both Christchurch and Gyula were very similar, with the BG distributions being almost identical. STAR provided safe GC with very few patients experiencing severe hypoglycemia (BG < 2.2 mmol/L, <5 patients, 1.5 %).
Conclusions:
STAR outperformed its predecessor, SPRINT, by providing higher nutrition and equally safe, effective control for all the days of patient stay, while lowering the number of measurements and interventions required. The STAR protocol has the ability to deliver high performance and high safety across patient types, time, clinical practice culture (Christchurch and Gyula) and clinical resources.
More Related Videos
05:46The Stroke Preclinical Assessment Network Multi-laboratory Model of Thromboembolic Stroke with Thrombolysis: TE-MCAo
Published on: December 19, 2025
04:53A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Preclinical Development: Overview
Pharmacovigilance
This process, termed pharmacovigilance, aims to detect, evaluate, and minimize harmful effects related to medication use. The data collection for pharmacovigilance depends on spontaneous reporting systems, where healthcare professionals or patients voluntarily report suspected ADRs.
In some cases, there...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Clinically Relevant Drug Product Specifications: Methods of Establishment