OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine patient satisfaction in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes receiving aninhaled insulin or subcutaneous insulin regimen, as assessed by pooled analysis of two 12-week parent studies and 1-year extension studies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In the 12-week parent studies, patients with type 1 (n = 70) or type 2 (n = 51) diabetes were randomized to an inhaled insulin or subcutaneous insulin regimen. In the 1-year extension studies, patients were allowed to select either treatment regimen. Patient satisfaction was assessed at baseline, week 12, and 1 year using the Patient Satisfaction with Insulin Therapy questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 60 patients who receivedinhaled insulin during the parent studies, 85.0% (n = 51) chose to continue treatment, 13.3% (n = 8) switched to subcutaneous insulin, and 1.7% (n = 1) did not continue. Of the 61 patients who receivedsubcutaneous insulin, 21.3% (n = 13) chose to continue treatment, 75.4% (n = 46) switched to inhaled insulin, and 3.3% (n = 2) did not continue. From baseline (parent studies) to 1 year (extension studies), HbA(1c) reductions of 0.8% were sustained, and greater improvements were observed in the inhaled insulin group compared with the subcutaneous insulin group in terms of overall satisfaction (37.9 vs. 3.1%; P < 0.01) and ease of use (43.2 vs. -0.9%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Inhaled insulin was preferred over subcutaneous insulin, which resulted in greater patient satisfaction up to 1 year in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes with durable effects on HbA(1c) levels.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine patient satisfaction in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes receiving an inhaled insulin or subcutaneous insulin regimen, as assessed by pooled analysis of two 12-week parent studies and 1-year extension studies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In the 12-week parent studies, patients with type 1 (n = 70) or type 2 (n = 51) diabetes were randomized to an inhaled insulin or subcutaneous insulin regimen. In the 1-year extension studies, patients were allowed to select either treatment regimen. Patient satisfaction was assessed at baseline, week 12, and 1 year using the Patient Satisfaction with Insulin Therapy questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 60 patients who received inhaled insulin during the parent studies, 85.0% (n = 51) chose to continue treatment, 13.3% (n = 8) switched to subcutaneous insulin, and 1.7% (n = 1) did not continue. Of the 61 patients who received subcutaneous insulin, 21.3% (n = 13) chose to continue treatment, 75.4% (n = 46) switched to inhaled insulin, and 3.3% (n = 2) did not continue. From baseline (parent studies) to 1 year (extension studies), HbA(1c) reductions of 0.8% were sustained, and greater improvements were observed in the inhaled insulin group compared with the subcutaneous insulin group in terms of overall satisfaction (37.9 vs. 3.1%; P < 0.01) and ease of use (43.2 vs. -0.9%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled insulin was preferred over subcutaneous insulin, which resulted in greater patient satisfaction up to 1 year in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes with durable effects on HbA(1c) levels.
Authors: Martin H Prins; Alexia Marrel; Paulo Carita; David Anderson; Marie-Germaine Bousser; Harry Crijns; Silla Consoli; Benoit Arnould Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2009-02-06 Impact factor: 3.186