ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Level of Satisfaction Among Patients Using Insulin Administered by Pen vs Vial/Syringe. An Observational Prospective Study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To determine the satisfaction of patients with diabetes mellitus who used subcutaneous insulin application devices in Colombia. Patients and Methods: An observational prospective study of patients with diabetes mellitus receiving insulin treatment in Colombia. Sociodemographic, comorbidity and pharmacological data were taken from a drug dispensing database. Through telephone calls, satisfaction with application devices was evaluated with Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire status version (DTSQ-s). Satisfaction was considered high at a score ≥30 points. The change in the type of insulin delivery device (ie, from pen to vial/syringe, and from vial/syringe to pen) was evaluated during a 1-year follow-up. Results: A total of 382 patients from 75 cities were selected, with a median age of 66.0 years, and 56.3% were women, and 65.2% were treated with long-acting insulins. The mean DTSQ-s score was 26.6±5.3 points, and 38.7% presented high satisfaction, without statistically significant differences between pen and vial/syringe. A total of 18.8% changed the administration device, mainly those that came from Bogotá-Cundinamarca (OR:2.19; 95% CI:1.01-4.75), in concomitant treatment with other antidiabetic drugs (OR:2.28; 95% CI:1.00-5.22) and those who previously used insulin in vial/syringe (OR:33.90; 95% CI:11.88-96.74). Conclusion: The participants had low satisfaction with the insulin delivery device. No statistically significant differences were found in satisfaction between those who received pen vs vial/syringe insulin, and patients using the latter had a high probability of switching to insulin pen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.