First aid glucose administration routes for symptomatic hypoglycaemia.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 04 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 12 4 2019
medline: 29 5 2019
entrez: 12 4 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Hypoglycaemia is a common occurrence in people with diabetes but can also result from an imbalance in glucose homeostasis in the absence of diabetes. The best enteral route for glucose administration for suspected hypoglycaemia in a first aid situation is unknown. To assess the effects of first aid glucose administration by any route appropriate for use by first-aid providers (buccal, sublingual, oral, rectal) for symptomatic hypoglycaemia. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL as well as grey literature (records identified in the WHO ICTRP Search Portal, ClinicalTrials.gov and the EU Clinical Trials Register) up to July 2018. We searched reference lists of included studies retrieved by the above searches. We included studies involving adults and children with documented or suspected hypoglycaemia as well as healthy volunteers, in which glucose was administered by any enteral route appropriate for use by first-aid providers. Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, extracted data and evaluated trials for overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE instrument. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool to assess the risk of bias in the randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the 'risk of bias In non-randomised studies of interventions' (ROBINS-I) tool, in addition to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions recommendations on cross-over studies, for the non-RCTs. We reported continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% CIs. All data on glucose concentrations were converted to mg/dL. We contacted authors of included studies to obtain missing data. From 6394 references, we included four studies evaluating 77 participants, including two RCTs, studying children and adults with hypoglycaemia, respectively, and two non-RCTs with healthy volunteers. The studies included three different routes of glucose administration (sublingual, buccal and a combination of oral and buccal administration). All studies had a high risk of bias in one or more 'Risk of bias' domain.Glucose administration by the sublingual route, in the form of table sugar under the tongue, resulted in a higher blood glucose concentration after 20 minutes compared with the oral route in the very specific setting of children with hypoglycaemia and symptoms of concomitant malaria or respiratory tract infection (MD 17 mg/dL, 95% CI 4.4 to 29.6; P = 0.008; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-quality evidence). Resolution of hypoglycaemia at 80 minutes may favour sublingual administration (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.54; P = 0.006; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but no substantial difference could be demonstrated at 20 minutes (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.74; P = 0.16; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A decrease in the time to resolution of hypoglycaemia was found in favour of sublingual administration (MD -51.5 min, 95% CI -58 to -45; P < 0.001; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in either group. No data were available for resolution of symptoms and time to resolution of symptoms, and treatment delay.Glucose administered by the buccal route in one study resulted in a lower plasma glucose concentration after 20 minutes compared with oral administration (MD -14.4 mg/dL, 95% CI -17.5 to -11.4 for an imputed within-participants correlation coefficient of 0.9; P < 0.001; 1 trial; 16 participants; very low-quality evidence). In another study there were fewer participants with increased blood glucose at 20 minutes favouring oral glucose (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.98; P = 0.05; 1 study; 7 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for resolution of symptoms and time to resolution of symptoms, resolution of hypoglycaemia and time to resolution of hypoglycaemia, adverse events, and treatment delay.For the combined oral and buccal mucosal route (in the form of a dextrose gel) the MD was -15.3 mg/dL, 95%CI -33.6 to 3; P = 0.09; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-quality evidence . No improvement was identified for either route in the resolution of symptoms at 20 minutes or less following glucose administration (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.14; P = 0.08; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for time to resolution of symptoms, resolution of hypoglycaemia and time to resolution of hypoglycaemia, adverse events, and treatment delay. When providing first aid to individuals with hypoglycaemia, oral glucose administration results in a higher blood glucose concentrations after 20 minutes when compared with buccal administration of glucose. A difference in plasma glucose concentration could not be demonstrated, when administering a dextrose gel, defined as "a combined oral and buccal mucosal route" compared to oral administration of a glucose tablet or solution. In the specific population of children with concomitant malaria and respiratory illness, sublingual sugar results in a higher blood glucose concentration after 20 minutes when compared with oral administration.These results need to be interpreted cautiously because our confidence in the body of evidence is very low due to the low number of participants and studies as well as methodological deficiencies in the included studies.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Hypoglycaemia is a common occurrence in people with diabetes but can also result from an imbalance in glucose homeostasis in the absence of diabetes. The best enteral route for glucose administration for suspected hypoglycaemia in a first aid situation is unknown.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of first aid glucose administration by any route appropriate for use by first-aid providers (buccal, sublingual, oral, rectal) for symptomatic hypoglycaemia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL as well as grey literature (records identified in the WHO ICTRP Search Portal, ClinicalTrials.gov and the EU Clinical Trials Register) up to July 2018. We searched reference lists of included studies retrieved by the above searches.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included studies involving adults and children with documented or suspected hypoglycaemia as well as healthy volunteers, in which glucose was administered by any enteral route appropriate for use by first-aid providers.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, extracted data and evaluated trials for overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE instrument. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool to assess the risk of bias in the randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the 'risk of bias In non-randomised studies of interventions' (ROBINS-I) tool, in addition to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions recommendations on cross-over studies, for the non-RCTs. We reported continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% CIs. All data on glucose concentrations were converted to mg/dL. We contacted authors of included studies to obtain missing data.
MAIN RESULTS
From 6394 references, we included four studies evaluating 77 participants, including two RCTs, studying children and adults with hypoglycaemia, respectively, and two non-RCTs with healthy volunteers. The studies included three different routes of glucose administration (sublingual, buccal and a combination of oral and buccal administration). All studies had a high risk of bias in one or more 'Risk of bias' domain.Glucose administration by the sublingual route, in the form of table sugar under the tongue, resulted in a higher blood glucose concentration after 20 minutes compared with the oral route in the very specific setting of children with hypoglycaemia and symptoms of concomitant malaria or respiratory tract infection (MD 17 mg/dL, 95% CI 4.4 to 29.6; P = 0.008; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-quality evidence). Resolution of hypoglycaemia at 80 minutes may favour sublingual administration (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.54; P = 0.006; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but no substantial difference could be demonstrated at 20 minutes (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.74; P = 0.16; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A decrease in the time to resolution of hypoglycaemia was found in favour of sublingual administration (MD -51.5 min, 95% CI -58 to -45; P < 0.001; 1 study; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in either group. No data were available for resolution of symptoms and time to resolution of symptoms, and treatment delay.Glucose administered by the buccal route in one study resulted in a lower plasma glucose concentration after 20 minutes compared with oral administration (MD -14.4 mg/dL, 95% CI -17.5 to -11.4 for an imputed within-participants correlation coefficient of 0.9; P < 0.001; 1 trial; 16 participants; very low-quality evidence). In another study there were fewer participants with increased blood glucose at 20 minutes favouring oral glucose (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.98; P = 0.05; 1 study; 7 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for resolution of symptoms and time to resolution of symptoms, resolution of hypoglycaemia and time to resolution of hypoglycaemia, adverse events, and treatment delay.For the combined oral and buccal mucosal route (in the form of a dextrose gel) the MD was -15.3 mg/dL, 95%CI -33.6 to 3; P = 0.09; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-quality evidence . No improvement was identified for either route in the resolution of symptoms at 20 minutes or less following glucose administration (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.14; P = 0.08; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for time to resolution of symptoms, resolution of hypoglycaemia and time to resolution of hypoglycaemia, adverse events, and treatment delay.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When providing first aid to individuals with hypoglycaemia, oral glucose administration results in a higher blood glucose concentrations after 20 minutes when compared with buccal administration of glucose. A difference in plasma glucose concentration could not be demonstrated, when administering a dextrose gel, defined as "a combined oral and buccal mucosal route" compared to oral administration of a glucose tablet or solution. In the specific population of children with concomitant malaria and respiratory illness, sublingual sugar results in a higher blood glucose concentration after 20 minutes when compared with oral administration.These results need to be interpreted cautiously because our confidence in the body of evidence is very low due to the low number of participants and studies as well as methodological deficiencies in the included studies.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30973639
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013283.pub2
pmc: PMC6459163
doi:

Substances chimiques

Glucose IY9XDZ35W2

Types de publication

Journal Article Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD013283

Références

Prehosp Emerg Care. 2016 Jul-Aug;20(4):524-30
pubmed: 26930393
Syst Rev. 2014 Jul 24;3:82
pubmed: 25056145
Diabetes Care. 1982 Sep-Oct;5(5):512-7
pubmed: 6765227
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Apr 11;4:CD013283
pubmed: 30973639
BMJ. 2003 Jan 25;326(7382):219
pubmed: 12543843
Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Jun;96(25):e7271
pubmed: 28640135
BMJ. 2016 Oct 12;355:i4919
pubmed: 27733354
Pediatr Diabetes. 2010 May;11(3):154-8
pubmed: 19663922
J Eval Clin Pract. 2012 Apr;18(2):209-15
pubmed: 21040252
Arch Intern Med. 1990 Mar;150(3):589-93
pubmed: 2310277
CMAJ. 2013 Mar 5;185(4):E201-11
pubmed: 23359047
Res Synth Methods. 2014 Mar;5(1):79-85
pubmed: 26054027
J Med Econ. 2013 Dec;16(12):1453-61
pubmed: 24144009
Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2009 Sep;153(3):205-9
pubmed: 19851433
JAMA. 1978 Oct 6;240(15):1611-2
pubmed: 691147
Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1539-58
pubmed: 12111919
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100
pubmed: 19621070
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 04;(5):CD011027
pubmed: 27142842
Ann Rheum Dis. 2011 Jun;70(6):886-90
pubmed: 21378403
BMJ. 2008 Apr 26;336(7650):924-6
pubmed: 18436948
J Trop Pediatr. 2009 Oct;55(5):287-9
pubmed: 19822563
Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2009 Sep;297(3):R716-22
pubmed: 19553500
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2003 Oct-Dec;7(4):458-65
pubmed: 14582099
Circulation. 2015 Oct 20;132(16 Suppl 1):S269-311
pubmed: 26472857
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):MR000005
pubmed: 17443628
Acad Emerg Med. 1998 Jul;5(7):691-4
pubmed: 9678393
Int J Epidemiol. 2002 Feb;31(1):140-9
pubmed: 11914310
BMJ. 2008 Mar 15;336(7644):601-5
pubmed: 18316340
Resuscitation. 2015 Oct;95:e225-61
pubmed: 26477426
BMJ. 2010 Feb 15;340:c365
pubmed: 20156912
Pediatrics. 2005 Nov;116(5):e648-53
pubmed: 16263979
Malar J. 2008 Nov 23;7:242
pubmed: 19025610
Emerg Med J. 2017 Feb;34(2):100-106
pubmed: 27644757
BMJ. 2011 Jul 22;343:d4002
pubmed: 21784880
Diabet Med. 2014 Jan;31(1):92-101
pubmed: 23796113
BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60
pubmed: 12958120

Auteurs

Emmy De Buck (E)

Centre for Evidence-Based Practice (CEBaP), Belgian Red Cross, Motstraat 42, Mechelen, Belgium, 2800.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH