Evidence mapPaperPMID 34542865Full record

ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2021

Satisfaction, Preference and Injection Habits of Switching to 200 Units/ml Insulin Lispro Pen from 100 Units/ml: A Patient Survey in Germany.

Jieling Chen, Paul Williams, Magaly Perez-Nieves, Carolina Piras De Oliveira, Erik Spaepen, Beatrice Osumili, Jiat-Ling Poon, Nanette C Schloot, Barbara Thun, Matthias Blüher

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact, top 82% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Jieling ChenLilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN, 46285, USA.
Paul WilliamsIQVIA, Real-World Solutions, 17 bis place des Reflets, Tour D2, TSA 64567, 92099, La Defense Cedex, France. paul.williams@iqvia.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6259-0390
Magaly Perez-NievesLilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN, 46285, USA.
Carolina Piras De OliveiraLilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN, 46285, USA.
Erik SpaepenHaaPACS GmbH, Bahnhofstraße 19C, 69198, Schriesheim, Germany.
Beatrice OsumiliEli Lilly and Company Limited, 8 Arlington Square West, Downshire Way, Bracknell, RG12 1PU, UK.
Jiat-Ling PoonLilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN, 46285, USA.
Nanette C SchlootLilly Deutschland GmbH, Werner-Reimers-Str. 2, 61352, Bad Homburg vor der Höhe, Germany.
Barbara ThunIQVIA Commercial GmbH & Co. OHG, Real-World Solutions, Landshuter Allee 10, 80637, München, Germany.
Matthias BlüherKlinik und Poliklinik für Endokrinologie, Nephrologie, Rheumatologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Eli Lilly (United States) · USEli Lilly (Germany) · DEEli Lilly (United Kingdom) · GBIQVIA (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity Hospital Leipzig · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe study was designed to assess patient satisfaction, preferences and injection habits for patients using insulin lispro 200 units/ml pen (IL200) compared to their previously used disposable 100 units/ml mealtime insulin pen ("MTI-100 pen") in Germany.

methodsA site-based, cross-sectional study involving a self-reported survey and medical record extraction in patients with diabetes currently using IL200 for between 3 and 12 months and had previously used any disposable MTI-100 pen.

resultsOf 114 patients included, 83.3% were satisfied with IL200 and 3.5% were dissatisfied; 70.2% preferred IL200 over their previous MTI-100 pen and 4.4% preferred their previous MTI-100 pen. The main reasons for IL200 preference were the amount of insulin the pen carries, longer use before discarding, number of non-empty pens discarded, injection volume and frequency replacing pens. Patients discarded (median) 4 IL200 pens per month with 5.3% discarding more than 10 units in their last pen. When insufficient insulin remained to complete a dose, 74.6% injected the remainder and completed with a new pen, 19.3% discarded the pen with remaining insulin, 7.0% saved it for future use and 1.8% left the dose incomplete.

conclusionsSatisfaction and preference for IL200 was high in this sample of patients using IL200 for 3-12 months. Reasons were consistent with IL200 features, explaining the better patient experience and potential resource saving transitioning from a disposable MTI-100 pen.

Indexed as

Concentrated insulinDiabetes mellitusInsulin lispro 200 units/mlMealtime insulinPatient preferencePatient satisfactionPatient survey

Identifiers

PMID34542865
PMCPMC8519973
OpenAlexW3200858330

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.