Sliding-scale Insulin Does Not Control Steroid-induced Hyperglycemia in a Non-diabetic Patient, No Matter How You Tune It
Abstract
Sliding-scale insulin is the default hospital response to high blood glucose. Its correction factor was designed for patients who make no insulin, yet it is routinely ordered for patients whose pancreas still works, including those on high-dose steroids. We treat the sliding scale as what it is, a proportional controller sampled every four hours, acting on a patient who already contains a working glucose controller of her own. We test it in a non-diabetic adolescent on high-dose corticosteroids and parenteral nutrition, and in 4,995 virtual patients. It fails for three structural reasons, and no choice of correction factor fixes any of them. First, the patient's own loop settles in 11.5 minutes while injected insulin takes 64 minutes to peak, so most of each dose simply replaces insulin she would have secreted; in simulation the ordered scale moved her mean glucose by less than 1.5 mg/dL. Second, one unit lowers glucose twice as much at 110 mg/dL as at 190, so any correction factor strong enough to work when glucose is high overshoots when it is low; in 99.5% of virtual patients no constant factor does both. Third, four-hour sampling is far below the Nyquist rate, so successive readings are uncorrelated and each dose responds to a value that does not persist. Even the argument that correction doses rest the beta cells, taken on its own terms, favors continuous delivery. We propose replacing the scale with a continuous insulin infusion co-delivered with the dextrose and adjusted once a day on mean glucose, the one quantity four-hour monitoring can measure.
Related
- Disruption of Anticipatory Insulin Secretion in Patients with Hyperglycemia and Obesity
- Association between the stress hyperglycemia ratio and neovascular glaucoma in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy
- Accounting for Insulin-on-board in Large Language Model Advice about Pediatric Hyperglycemia
- Association Between the Relative Duration of Sliding Scale Insulin Use and the Length of Hospital Stay in Non-Critically Ill Patients with Type 2 Diabetes
- Glargine-to-intravenous insulin dose ratio, rebound hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia after discontinuation of insulin infusion in critically ill adults: a retrospective cohort study
BibTeX
@misc{regev2026slidingscale,
title = {{Sliding-scale Insulin Does Not Control Steroid-induced Hyperglycemia in a Non-diabetic Patient, No Matter How You Tune It}},
author = {Nir Regev and Guy Regev},
howpublished = {arXiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2610.08730},
eprint = {2610.08730},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.08730},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Sliding-scale Insulin Does Not Control Steroid-induced Hyperglycemia in a Non-diabetic Patient, No Matter How You Tune It
AU - Nir Regev
AU - Guy Regev
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/07
PB - arXiv
DO - 10.48550/arxiv.2610.08730
UR - https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.08730
AB - Sliding-scale insulin is the default hospital response to high blood glucose. Its correction factor was designed for patients who make no insulin, yet it is routinely ordered for patients whose pancreas still works, including those on high-dose steroids. We treat the sliding scale as what it is, a proportional controller sampled every four hours, acting on a patient who already contains a working glucose controller of her own. We test it in a non-diabetic adolescent on high-dose corticosteroids and parenteral nutrition, and in 4,995 virtual patients. It fails for three structural reasons, and no choice of correction factor fixes any of them. First, the patient's own loop settles in 11.5 minutes while injected insulin takes 64 minutes to peak, so most of each dose simply replaces insulin she would have secreted; in simulation the ordered scale moved her mean glucose by less than 1.5 mg/dL. Second, one unit lowers glucose twice as much at 110 mg/dL as at 190, so any correction factor strong enough to work when glucose is high overshoots when it is low; in 99.5% of virtual patients no constant factor does both. Third, four-hour sampling is far below the Nyquist rate, so successive readings are uncorrelated and each dose responds to a value that does not persist. Even the argument that correction doses rest the beta cells, taken on its own terms, favors continuous delivery. We propose replacing the scale with a continuous insulin infusion co-delivered with the dextrose and adjusted once a day on mean glucose, the one quantity four-hour monitoring can measure.
ER -