Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Katharina Neubauer is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Katharina Neubauer.


Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics | 2015

Standardized Glycemic Management with a Computerized Workflow and Decision Support System for Hospitalized Patients with Type 2 Diabetes on Different Wards.

Katharina Neubauer; Julia K. Mader; Bernhard Höll; Felix Aberer; Klaus Donsa; Thomas Augustin; Lukas Schaupp; Stephan Spat; Peter Beck; Fruhwald Fm; Christian Schnedl; Alexander R. Rosenkranz; David B. Lumenta; Lars-Peter Kamolz; Johannes Plank; Thomas R. Pieber

Abstract Background: This study investigated the efficacy, safety, and usability of standardized glycemic management by a computerized decision support system for non-critically ill hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes on four different wards. Materials and Methods: In this open, noncontrolled intervention study, glycemic management of 99 patients with type 2 diabetes (62% acute admissions; 41 females; age, 67±11 years; hemoglobin A1c, 65±21 mmol/mol; body mass index, 30.4±6.5 kg/m2) on clinical wards (Cardiology, Endocrinology, Nephrology, Plastic Surgery) of a tertiary-care hospital was guided by GlucoTab® (Joanneum Research GmbH [Graz, Austria] and Medical University of Graz [Graz, Austria]), a mobile decision support system providing automated workflow support and suggestions for insulin dosing to nurses and physicians. Results: Adherence to insulin dosing suggestions was high (96.5% bolus, 96.7% basal). The primary outcome measure, percentage of blood glucose (BG) measurements in the range of 70–140 mg/dL, occurred in 50.2±22.2% of all measurements. The overall mean BG level was 154±35 mg/dL. BG measurements in the ranges of 60–70 mg/dL, 40–60 mg/dL, and <40 mg/dL occurred in 1.4%, 0.5%, and 0.0% of all measurements, respectively. A regression analysis showed that acute admission to the Cardiology Ward (+30 mg/dL) and preexisting home insulin therapy (+26 mg/dL) had the strongest impact on mean BG. Acute admission to other wards had minor effects (+4 mg/dL). Ninety-one percent of the healthcare professionals felt confident with GlucoTab, and 89% believed in its practicality and 80% in its ability to prevent medication errors. Conclusions: An efficacious, safe, and user-accepted implementation of GlucoTab was demonstrated. However, for optimized personalized patient care, further algorithm modifications are required.


Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism | 2014

Efficacy, usability and sequence of operations of a workflow‐integrated algorithm for basal–bolus insulin therapy in hospitalized type 2 diabetes patients

Julia K. Mader; Katharina Neubauer; Lukas Schaupp; Thomas Augustin; Peter Beck; Stephan Spat; B. Höll; Gerlies Treiber; Fruhwald Fm; Thomas R. Pieber; Johannes Plank

To evaluate glycaemic control and usability of a workflow‐integrated algorithm for basal–bolus insulin therapy in a proof‐of‐concept study to develop a decision support system in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes.


Journal of diabetes science and technology | 2013

Failure to Control Hyperglycemia in NonCritically Ill Diabetes Patients despite Standard Glycemic Management in a Hospital Setting

Katharina Neubauer; Lukas Schaupp; Johannes Plank; Thomas Augustin; Selma I. Mautner; Bernd Tschapeller; Thomas R. Pieber

Background: Successful control of hyperglycemia has been shown to improve outcomes for diabetes patients in a clinical setting. We assessed the quality of physician-based glycemic management in two general wards, considering the most recent recommendations for glycemic control for noncritically ill patients (<140 mg/dl for premeal glucose). Methods: Quality of glycemic management of 50 patients in two wards (endocrinology, cardiology) was assessed retrospectively by analyzing blood glucose (BG) levels, the glycemic management effort, and the online questionnaire. Results: Glycemic control was clearly above the recommended target (mean BG levels: Endocrinology: 175 ± 62 mg/dl; cardiology: 186 ± 68 mg/dl). When comparing the first half with the second half of the hospital stay, we found no difference in glycemic control (endocrinology: 168 ± 32 vs 164 ± 42 mg/dl, P = .67; cardiology: 174 ± 36 mg/dl vs 170 ± 42 mg/dl, P =.51) and in insulin dose (endocrinology: 15 ± 14 IU vs 15 ± 13 IU per day, P = .87; cardiology: 27 ± 17 IU vs 27 ± 18 IU per day, P = .92), despite frequent BG measurements (endocrinology: 2.7 per day; cardiology: 3.2 per day). A lack of clearly defined BG targets was indicated in the questionnaire. Conclusion: The recommended BG target range was not achieved in both wards. Analysis of routine glycemic management demonstrated considerable glycemic management effort, but also a lack of translation into adequate insulin therapy. Implementation of corrective measures, such as structured treatment protocols, is essential.


International Journal of Medical Informatics | 2016

Impact of errors in paper-based and computerized diabetes management with decision support for hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes. A post-hoc analysis of a before and after study

Klaus Donsa; Peter Beck; Bernhard Höll; Julia K. Mader; Lukas Schaupp; Johannes Plank; Katharina Neubauer; Christian Baumgartner; Thomas R. Pieber

OBJECTIVE Most preventable adverse drug events and medication errors occur during medication ordering. Medication order entry and clinical decision support are available on paper or as computerized systems. In this post-hoc analysis we investigated frequency and clinical impact of blood glucose (BG) documentation- and user-related calculation errors as well as workflow deviations in diabetes management. We aimed to compare a paper-based protocol to a computerized medication management system combined with clinical workflow and decision support. METHODS Seventy-nine hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were treated with an algorithm driven basal-bolus insulin regimen. BG measurements, which were the basis for insulin dose calculations, were manually entered either into the paper-based workflow protocol (PaperG: 37 patients) or into GlucoTab(®)-a mobile tablet PC based system (CompG: 42 patients). We used BG values from the laboratory information system as a reference. A workflow simulator was used to determine user calculation errors as well as workflow deviations and to estimate the effect of errors on insulin doses. The clinical impact of insulin dosing errors and workflow deviations on hypo- and hyperglycemia was investigated. RESULTS The BG documentation error rate was similar for PaperG (4.9%) and CompG group (4.0%). In PaperG group, 11.1% of manual insulin dose calculations were erroneous and the odds ratio (OR) of a hypoglycemic event following an insulin dosing error was 3.1 (95% CI: 1.4-6.8). The number of BG values influenced by insulin dosing errors was eightfold higher than in the CompG group. In the CompG group, workflow deviations occurred in 5.0% of the tasks which led to an increased likelihood of hyperglycemia, OR 2.2 (95% CI: 1.1-4.6). DISCUSSION Manual insulin dose calculations were the major source of error and had a particularly strong influence on hypoglycemia. By using GlucoTab(®), user calculation errors were entirely excluded. The immediate availability and automated handling of BG values from medical devices directly at the point of care has a high potential to reduce errors. Computerized systems facilitate the safe use of more complex insulin dosing algorithms without compromising usability. In CompG group, missed or delayed tasks had a significant effect on hyperglycemia, while in PaperG group insufficient precision of documentation times limited analysis. The use of old BG measurements was clinically less relevant. CONCLUSION Insulin dosing errors and workflow deviations led to measurable changes in clinical outcome. Diabetes management systems including decision support should address nurses as well as physicians in a computerized way. Our analysis shows that such systems reduce the frequency of errors and therefore decrease the probability of hypo- and hyperglycemia.


Safety in Health | 2015

Insulin Prescription Charts at a University Hospital: High Variability of Design Characteristics

Julia Kopanz; Katharina Neubauer; Gerald Sendlhofer; Barbara Semlitsch; Andreas Pak; Thomas R. Pieber; Johannes Plank

Background Diabetes mellitus exists in approximately 10% of hospitalized patients and hyperglycemia arises in 32 to 38% of patients in community hospitals [1-3]. Hyperglycemia is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and hospital costs, regardless of whether a hospitalized patient has a known history of diabetes or not [1,4]. Insulin has frequently been reported to be in the list of top 10 high alert medicines worldwide. The subcutaneous insulin prescribing chart provides a common tool for consistent communication, documentation, interpretation and administration of insulin orders. Evidence indicates that outcomes and safety can be compromised when significant variations in patient care exist [5]. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of design characteristics of subcutaneous insulin prescription charts at a University Hospital.


Clinical Drug Investigation | 2013

A Comparison of the Steady-State Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Profiles of 100 and 200 U/mL Formulations of Ultra-Long-Acting Insulin Degludec

Stefan Korsatko; Sigrid Deller; Gerd Koehler; Julia K. Mader; Katharina Neubauer; Charlotte L. Adrian; Henrik F. Thomsen; Hanne Haahr; Thomas R. Pieber


medical informatics europe | 2011

Design of a mobile, safety-critical in-patient glucose management system.

Bernhard Höll; Stephan Spat; Johannes Plank; Lukas Schaupp; Katharina Neubauer; Peter Beck; Franco Chiarugi; Vasilis Kontogiannis; Thomas R. Pieber; Andreas Holzinger


Safety in Health | 2016

Abstracts from the 4th Grazer Risk Day: Patient Safety in Routine

Magdalena Hoffmann; Anna K. Holl; Harald Burgsteiner; Thomas Pieber; Philipp Eller; Karin Amrein; Gerald Sendlhofer; Karina Leitgeb; Veronika Gombotz; Peter Tiefenbacher; Lars-Peter Kamolz; Sabine Papst; Susanne Gasteiner; Lars Peter Kamolz; Yvonne Müller; Marlies Hart; Julia Kopanz; Katharina Neubauer; Barbara Semlitsch; Andres Pak; Gerald Cuder; Thomas R. Pieber; Johannes Plank; Annemarie Schinko; Angelika Rother; Barbara Kirnbauer; Petra Rugani; Norbert Jakse; Johannes Bernhardt-Melischnig; Rudolf Egger


Archive | 2015

Système de proposition de dosage d'insuline

Stephan Spat; Bernhard Höll; Peter Beck; Thomas Truskaller; Reinhard Moser; Klaus Donsa; Johannes Plank; Julia K Mader; Katharina Neubauer; Lukas Schaupp; Thomas R Pieber


Diabetologie Und Stoffwechsel | 2014

Vergleich von zwei Algorithmen zur Basis-Bolus-Insulintherapie bei Patienten mit Diabetes mellitus Typ 2 im Krankenhaus

Julia K. Mader; Katharina Neubauer; Lukas Schaupp; Felix Aberer; Klaus Donsa; Thomas Augustin; Bernhard Höll; Stephan Spat; Peter Beck; Johannes Plank; Thomas R. Pieber

Collaboration


Dive into the Katharina Neubauer's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Johannes Plank

Medical University of Graz

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Thomas R. Pieber

Medical University of Graz

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lukas Schaupp

Medical University of Graz

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Julia K. Mader

Medical University of Graz

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Felix Aberer

Medical University of Graz

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge