Objectives: To determine whether relative hyperglycemia was associated with in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients independent of other prognostic variables and whether this association is affected by background glycemia. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: Mixed medical-surgical ICU in a metropolitan teaching hospital. Patients: From 2,617 admissions to ICU between January 27, 2016, and March 30, 2017, 1,262 consecutive patients who met inclusion and exclusion criteria were studied. Interventions: Glycosylated hemoglobin was used to estimate average glucose concentration over the prior 3 months. Glucose concentration on ICU admission was divided by estimated average glucose concentration to calculate the stress hyperglycemia ratio, an index of relative glycemia. Risk of death score was calculated using data submitted to the Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care Society. Measurements and Main Results: In this study, there were 186 deaths (14.7%). Admission glucose was significantly associated with mortality in univariate analysis (odds ratio = 1.08 per mmol/L glucose increment; p < 0.001) but not after adjustment for risk of death score (odds ratio = 1.01; p = 0.338). In contrast, stress hyperglycemia ratio was significantly associated with mortality both in univariate analysis (odds ratio = 1.09 per 0.1 stress hyperglycemia ratio increment; p < 0.001) and after adjustment for risk of death score (odds ratio = 1.03; p = 0.014). Unlike admission glucose concentration, stress hyperglycemia ratio was significantly associated with mortality in patients with glycosylated hemoglobin less than 6.5% (odds ratio = 1.08 per 0.1 stress hyperglycemia ratio increment; p < 0.001) and glycosylated hemoglobin greater than or equal to 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) (odds ratio = 1.08 per 0.1 stress hyperglycemia ratio increment; p = 0.005). Conclusions: Unlike absolute hyperglycemia, relative hyperglycemia, as assessed by the stress hyperglycemia ratio, independently predicts in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients across the glycemic spectrum. Future studies should investigate whether using measures of relative hyperglycemia to determine individualized glycemic treatment targets improves outcomes in ICU.

There were no differences in the efficacy or safety of the isophane and glargine-based insulin regimens. We recommend an initial daily insulin dose of 0.5 units/kg bodyweight if not on insulin, a greater than 30% increase in pre-prednisolone insulin dose and larger insulin dose adjustments in patients with prednisolone-induced hyperglycaemia.

Hospitalised patients taking prednisolone had substantial afternoon and evening hyperglycaemia despite receiving BBI via a protocol for inpatient hyperglycaemia. Specific insulin regimens for prednisolone-induced hyperglycaemia are needed that recommend more insulin during this time period.

Prednisolone-induced insulin resistance is not associated with postprandial vascular dysfunction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Reduced sympathetic activity may contribute to the reduction in postprandial arterial stiffness with acute prednisolone.

Rheumatoid arthritis patients have higher concentrations of ADMA and MMA, inhibitors of endothelial function. Chronic, but not acute, prednisolone therapy is associated with a lower ADMA concentration, suggesting a salutary effect of long-term glucocorticoid treatment on endothelial function.