Comparing patient preferences and healthcare provider recommendations with the pen versus vial-and-syringe insulin delivery in patients with type 2 diabetes

Andrew Ahmann, Sheryl L. Szeinbach, Jasvinder Gill, Louise Traylor, Satish K. Garg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to examine healthcare provider (HCP) recommendations and patient preferences for the insulin pen versus vial-and-syringe in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to assess clinical end points and safety outcomes. Subjects and Methods: Using a randomized, open-label, crossover design, in total, 405 insulin-naive adults with T2DM from 60 centers received basal insulin glargine in one of two device treatment sequences (2 weeks of pen followed by 2 weeks of vial-and-syringe, or vice versa). The primary end point, patient device preference, was evaluated at Week 4 (end of the crossover period) using the Insulin Injection Preference Questionnaire. Patient preference and HCP recommendation were assessed with one global item and three subscale items (blood glucose control, reluctance to use insulin, and long-term insulin use) using a 5-point scale ranging from 1=not preferred or not recommended to 5=preferred or recommended. Patients were then re-randomized to either pen or vial-and-syringe for further observation (6, 10, and 30 weeks) to evaluate clinical end points (glycosylated hemoglobin [A1C] and fasting blood glucose levels) and safety outcomes (hypoglycemia and adverse events). Results: Patients reported a significant preference for pens over vial-and-syringe, and HCPs strongly recommended pens over vial-and-syringe (both P

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)76-83
Number of pages8
JournalDiabetes Technology and Therapeutics
Volume16
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2014

Fingerprint

Patient Preference
Syringes
Health Personnel
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Insulin
Blood Glucose
Blood Safety
Equipment and Supplies
Glycosylated Hemoglobin A
Hypoglycemia
Cross-Over Studies
Fasting
Observation
Safety
Injections

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Endocrinology
  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
  • Medical Laboratory Technology

Cite this

Comparing patient preferences and healthcare provider recommendations with the pen versus vial-and-syringe insulin delivery in patients with type 2 diabetes. / Ahmann, Andrew; Szeinbach, Sheryl L.; Gill, Jasvinder; Traylor, Louise; Garg, Satish K.

In: Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics, Vol. 16, No. 2, 01.02.2014, p. 76-83.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ahmann, Andrew ; Szeinbach, Sheryl L. ; Gill, Jasvinder ; Traylor, Louise ; Garg, Satish K. / Comparing patient preferences and healthcare provider recommendations with the pen versus vial-and-syringe insulin delivery in patients with type 2 diabetes. In: Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics. 2014 ; Vol. 16, No. 2. pp. 76-83.
@article{c2f668e2a5f54f20afdda8e05d117296,
title = "Comparing patient preferences and healthcare provider recommendations with the pen versus vial-and-syringe insulin delivery in patients with type 2 diabetes",
abstract = "Objectives: This study aimed to examine healthcare provider (HCP) recommendations and patient preferences for the insulin pen versus vial-and-syringe in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to assess clinical end points and safety outcomes. Subjects and Methods: Using a randomized, open-label, crossover design, in total, 405 insulin-naive adults with T2DM from 60 centers received basal insulin glargine in one of two device treatment sequences (2 weeks of pen followed by 2 weeks of vial-and-syringe, or vice versa). The primary end point, patient device preference, was evaluated at Week 4 (end of the crossover period) using the Insulin Injection Preference Questionnaire. Patient preference and HCP recommendation were assessed with one global item and three subscale items (blood glucose control, reluctance to use insulin, and long-term insulin use) using a 5-point scale ranging from 1=not preferred or not recommended to 5=preferred or recommended. Patients were then re-randomized to either pen or vial-and-syringe for further observation (6, 10, and 30 weeks) to evaluate clinical end points (glycosylated hemoglobin [A1C] and fasting blood glucose levels) and safety outcomes (hypoglycemia and adverse events). Results: Patients reported a significant preference for pens over vial-and-syringe, and HCPs strongly recommended pens over vial-and-syringe (both P",
author = "Andrew Ahmann and Szeinbach, {Sheryl L.} and Jasvinder Gill and Louise Traylor and Garg, {Satish K.}",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/dia.2013.0172",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "76--83",
journal = "Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics",
issn = "1520-9156",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing patient preferences and healthcare provider recommendations with the pen versus vial-and-syringe insulin delivery in patients with type 2 diabetes

AU - Ahmann, Andrew

AU - Szeinbach, Sheryl L.

AU - Gill, Jasvinder

AU - Traylor, Louise

AU - Garg, Satish K.

PY - 2014/2/1

Y1 - 2014/2/1

N2 - Objectives: This study aimed to examine healthcare provider (HCP) recommendations and patient preferences for the insulin pen versus vial-and-syringe in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to assess clinical end points and safety outcomes. Subjects and Methods: Using a randomized, open-label, crossover design, in total, 405 insulin-naive adults with T2DM from 60 centers received basal insulin glargine in one of two device treatment sequences (2 weeks of pen followed by 2 weeks of vial-and-syringe, or vice versa). The primary end point, patient device preference, was evaluated at Week 4 (end of the crossover period) using the Insulin Injection Preference Questionnaire. Patient preference and HCP recommendation were assessed with one global item and three subscale items (blood glucose control, reluctance to use insulin, and long-term insulin use) using a 5-point scale ranging from 1=not preferred or not recommended to 5=preferred or recommended. Patients were then re-randomized to either pen or vial-and-syringe for further observation (6, 10, and 30 weeks) to evaluate clinical end points (glycosylated hemoglobin [A1C] and fasting blood glucose levels) and safety outcomes (hypoglycemia and adverse events). Results: Patients reported a significant preference for pens over vial-and-syringe, and HCPs strongly recommended pens over vial-and-syringe (both P

AB - Objectives: This study aimed to examine healthcare provider (HCP) recommendations and patient preferences for the insulin pen versus vial-and-syringe in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to assess clinical end points and safety outcomes. Subjects and Methods: Using a randomized, open-label, crossover design, in total, 405 insulin-naive adults with T2DM from 60 centers received basal insulin glargine in one of two device treatment sequences (2 weeks of pen followed by 2 weeks of vial-and-syringe, or vice versa). The primary end point, patient device preference, was evaluated at Week 4 (end of the crossover period) using the Insulin Injection Preference Questionnaire. Patient preference and HCP recommendation were assessed with one global item and three subscale items (blood glucose control, reluctance to use insulin, and long-term insulin use) using a 5-point scale ranging from 1=not preferred or not recommended to 5=preferred or recommended. Patients were then re-randomized to either pen or vial-and-syringe for further observation (6, 10, and 30 weeks) to evaluate clinical end points (glycosylated hemoglobin [A1C] and fasting blood glucose levels) and safety outcomes (hypoglycemia and adverse events). Results: Patients reported a significant preference for pens over vial-and-syringe, and HCPs strongly recommended pens over vial-and-syringe (both P

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84892656798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84892656798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/dia.2013.0172

DO - 10.1089/dia.2013.0172

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 76

EP - 83

JO - Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics

JF - Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics

SN - 1520-9156

IS - 2

ER -