Evidence mapPaperPMID 37501783Full record

ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2023

A self-controlled, cross-over study of intensive insulin treatment with needle-based injection versus needle-free injection in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes.

Quanying Wu, Mingqun Deng, Weihao Wang, Shuyi Yu, Miao Wang, Chao Sun, Qi Pan, Lixin Guo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
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

8 authors.

Quanying WuNursing Department, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Mingqun DengDepartment of Endocrinology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Weihao WangDepartment of Endocrinology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Shuyi YuDepartment of Endocrinology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Miao WangDepartment of Endocrinology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Chao SunNursing Department, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Qi PanDepartment of Endocrinology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Lixin GuoDepartment of Endocrinology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aims: Needle injection and needle-free injection were proven effective in improving glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. However, it is unclear if needle-free and needle injections of insulin during intensive insulin therapy in hospitalized patients provide similar efficacy and safety benefits. Methods: A self-controlled cross-over study was conducted on 62 patients with T2DM who received intensive long-acting and short-acting insulin injections with or without needles. The 7-point blood glucose test was performed on the 6th day after insulin administration and the injection method switched on the 7th day of hospitalization. The difference was compared in 7-point blood glucose levels. Results: The blood glucose levels at fasting (mean difference=-1.09 ± 2.38mmol/L, 95% CI, -1.69 to -0.48, p=0.0007) and post-breakfast (-1.14 ± 3.02mmol/L, 95%CI, -1.91 to -0.37, p=0.004) were better when patients were receiving needle-free injections compared to when receiving a needle injection. Indeed, daily blood glucose fluctuation, which presented as the area under the curve of glycemia, was decreased in needle-free injection periods (-0.3.48 ± 9.64, 95%CI, -5.95 to -1.01, p=0.0065). There was no significant difference in the dose of long-acting insulin between the two injection methods (-0.32 ± 2.69, 95%CI, -0.99 to 0.37, p>0.05). The dose of fast-acting insulin during the needle-free period was lower than that of when patients received needle injections (-1.66 ± 6.45, 95%CI, -3.29 to -0.025, p<0.05). There was no significant difference in satisfaction between the two regimens (-0.59 ± 1.55,95%CI, -0.938 to 0.509, p=0.557), but there was a significant difference in pain experience, favoring needle-free injections (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Glycemia was better controlled by needle-free insulin injections in hospitalized T2DM patients subjected to intensive glycemic control. These patients also experienced less pain than when insulin was injected with a needle.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Blood GlucoseCross-Over StudiesHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic AgentsInsulincross-over studydiabetesin hospitalintensive insulin therapyneedle-free injection

Identifiers

PMID37501783
PMCPMC10369336

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.