Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6 pmps +3 +6

Status
Not open for further replies.
kse

kse

Very Active Member
6/22.
Amps. 491. Ate 1 can FF. Shot 4.5
+3. 269
+6. 175. 1/2 can FF. 65 % drop

6/22
pmps 348. Ate 1 can FF. Shot Skinny 4
+3. 221. Ate 1/2 can FF 40 % drop
Skipping fluids tonight!
+6. 329



We are almost to the bottom of the vial of insulin-- we will get a new one today. She gets fluids tonight, that normally helps lower her bg.

Too high, too high, too high........pmps better!

I did not start the new vial tonight!
 
Re: Kitty 6/22

I am so sorry that Kitty is so high, that does stink
I think I would recommend that you do not start the Dasoquin
as that is really making Shakes go higher,
I am thinking of stopping because of it, he visablely does nt feel well since I started.

Hang in there, we will get there!

Denise and Shakes
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3

We'll take it!

It is lower than it went yesterday on a 312 preshot. Just goes to show, its not "just" the preshot that determines good cycles--you have to include what you shoot...right Joanna and Nancy?!!!
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3

I am trying to get my mind around Kitty's bgs and find a way to get her into lower numbers.

I have reviewed Kitty's spreadsheet and if I use the "percentage of drop" mentality of dosing, it appears the data would support the following:

(Sue, I wish I had tested more earlier in the dance at mid-cycle for comparison data!!!)

KItty Specific***
3.0 to 3.5 units-- Nadir- avg 30 percent drop
4.0 units-- Nadir- avg 45 percent drop
4.25 units--- Nadir- avg 55 percent drop
4.5 units-- Nadir- avg 65 percent drop
4.5 units- highest units administered to date

** I realize these can vary and if I dose to this scale, I need to allow for differences on both the high and low side of the average.

This is based on Kitty's numbers and is an average of test taken. There were some "wonky" ones, both high and low that I discarded. There are also some variables including fluids, foods, and timing of meals that appear to have some impact for her.


Does anyone use a percentage guide like this when dosing?


Thanks!
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3

I don't know if anyone uses it, but I think it is an interesting idea and certainly worth a try.

If you are the bottom of the vial, it could explain your wonky numbers - maybe.

BTW, you are doing a great job being here and supporting everyone and offering some great advice! :RAHCAT :RAHCAT
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6

+6. 175. 65 percent drop

I am going for my dental now!!! Ugh..
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6

I think the higher preshot numbers are due to the lower midcycle numbers - or it could be the insulin wearing off too soon due to it being at the end of the vial. Just my $0.02. :-D
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6

Yeah end of the vial can be a problem. I would probably go with just the 4u rather than 4.5 when you start the new vial. Yes there is plenty of room even if the insulin is stronger, but that's just what I'd do.

I've never seen anyone chart the %s like that, but that's pretty cool! I've seen it mostly as 60% - 70% something around that is good, less than that is usually not effective enough, and more than that is usually too steep a drop, or would put your nadir too low, etc. I think of it as what you want on a 150 - 180 PS, so the % that gets you to a 50 - 80 nadir is what you are going for.
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6

What I found most interesting in figuring the percentages on her historical data, was the confirmation that irregardless of the preshot, she does not get significant movement on anything less than 4 units.

It was so much clearer to see the drops, once I took the spreadsheet and calculated it to percentages.

Okay, so our pmps was 348 and I shot 4 units. She pulled off the needle a little at the end-- so, I hope she got it all. She is suppose to get fluids tonight also. I might wait until +3 and check her bg first -- sometimes the fluids drop her pretty fast. This might be our first time shooting 4 units into a mid 300 number and giving fluids-- I am not sure. I am still a little jumpy!
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6 pmps

Ok, so my head is spinning right now from reading all of that.... confused_cat

Just goes to show, its not "just" the preshot that determines good cycles--you have to include what you shoot...right Joanna and Nancy?!!!

I am sorry but I do not understand that statement...do you think you could try to explain that?
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6 pmps

;-) Hey Denise!

Sorry you missed the party Monday night-- I was looking for you!!!

My comment you are referring to was a reference to me undershooting a 312 preshot, thus having a flat high day earlier in the week. Then this morning, we are facing almost a 500 amps, but by dosing the "right" amount, we had a good day! I for one, have been guilty of determining if Kitty had a good day or not based solely on her preshots. But, I am slowly starting to realize that if I shoot the proper dose ( I think I have underdosed to a fault) into the preshot, we can still have a good day. We can overcome crappy preshots by what we dose.


Does that make any sense? It was more of a stab at some dosing decisions I have made.
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6 pmps

UMMM... maybe,
so If you have a high preshot you up the dose a little to try to bring her down?
Is that it?
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6 pmps

Not saying you should-- but I am realizing that I am underdosing at times.

I went through my spreadsheet today and actually figured the percentage drop that my doses have been giving me. When I get a lower preshot, I have pulled my dose back to far-- leaving me with a lot of flat cycles. I actually have gotten better curves on higher preshots, because I haven't been scared!

I can't say the same would hold true for Shakes and you. It is just something I have noticed with me and Kitty.

Go have some wine -- we are over thinking!!!!
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6 pmps

+3 221

40 percent drop in 3 hours-- skipping fluids tonight to see what the drop
will be without fluids (normally they increase drop)
 
Re: Kitty 6/22 amps +3 +6 pmps

Kim, you sound busy, Sue would be proud! (no I won't go there!I am too tired!) I have felt that you err on the side of caution, but you needed to figure that out yourself and your doing a great job! I think if you want your #'s to come down you need to be aggressive. Now sometimes that doesn't always work but it would be great to see what your PS #'s would look like if you did.

Just remember there are more variables than #'s and for cats that have had DKA .... well, you know. ohmygod_smile But as always I will be along for the ride! :lol: Nancy
 
Kim, your percentages really make things clearer! You know, my first time around with Squamee on insulin, I was taught to totally go by the nadir to determine doses and just use the ps to be sure it was safe to shoot. This seems like a combination of both approaches. I like it.
 
Yeah, you definitely don't want to base the dose, or good day/bad day evaluations on the PS alone. A lot of times the PS is just a tiny piece of the puzzle - I saw Bix once go from blues at +11.5 to blacks at +12 - really it was quite a good day, just a crappy PS at the end. I think that's why I get puzzled sometimes when I have seen people comment that the #s are a lot better or a lot worse on a dose, when to me they look pretty much the same. In my mind, a 300 PS isn't all that different from a 350 or a 400. They are all sucky, it's just the degree of suckiness.

My understanding has always been that you evaluate PZI based on the combination of PS and nadir.

That's pretty cool Kim that you ran all the #s to figure out the %s. I was told that principle at some point when I got here, but I never actually proved it to myself :oops: , and only ever used it in a fairly vague way. Good on ya! :)
 
Judy, I like what you mentioned about evaluating by the nadir, I think we might see better results overall if we emphasized that more. That's what they do on the Ls, but of course they don't have the same profile as PZI, or the no-shoot question. I know there was talk for a while of trying to apply the L protocol to PZI, but it got drowned in controversy. I think it's a good idea, but I don't feel qualified to address the finer points to be sure it is used safely, etc.

But it's a good reminder for you to mention judging by the nadir - it doesn't seem like we mention that much these days come to think of it. It seems like we are focused a lot on sort of the quality of the curve - how much of a drop, is it too steep or too shallow, is it inverse or flat and what does that mean, w/o sticking with some of the real basics, like "if your nadir is above 100 and you aren't seeing a clear rebound pattern, your dose is too low". I know I tend to stray pretty easily into "interpretation" and I think sometimes we (I :oops: ) make it too complicated!!!!

Good reminder, thanks for mentioning it!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top