Literature DB >> 17288697

Effect of inhaled insulin on patient-reported outcomes and treatment preference in patients with type 1 diabetes.

Risa P Hayes1, Douglas Muchmore, Jennifer Schmitke.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient-reported outcomes and treatment preference between preprandial inhaled insulin and preprandial subcutaneous (SC) insulin in the context of a clinical trial of crossover design with a primary objective of comparing HbA(1C) between groups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Multi-center, randomized, open-label, two-arm crossover trial conducted in the US and Canada with two 12-week periods comparing preference between preprandial human insulin inhalation powder (HIIP; AIR inhaled insulin) and preprandial SC insulin (regular human insulin or insulin lispro) in patients with type 1 diabetes. Patients received HIIP plus insulin glargine during period 1 and SC insulin plus insulin glargine during period 2, or the reverse sequence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: SF-36 Vitality Subscale, Diabetes Symptom Checklist-Revised subscales, Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, Insulin Delivery System Questionnaire, HIIP-specific questionnaire, preference question.
RESULTS: Of 137 patients entered, 119 completed the study (54% female, mean age 40.9 +/- 12.4 years, mean HbA(1C) 8.1 +/- 1.0%). Patients had significantly greater treatment satisfaction and more positive evaluation of their insulin delivery system (easier to control blood sugar, less lifestyle impact) with HIIP than with SC insulin (all p < 0.01). Patients preferring HIIP (80%) were significantly more confident about (p = 0.005) and comfortable with (p = 0.003) using the system than those preferring SC insulin. Results may not be generalizable to all patients with type 1 diabetes.
CONCLUSIONS: Some patients desire alternatives to insulin injection. In this study 80% preferred HIIP to injected insulin. Other patients feel more comfortable with familiar insulin delivery. Healthcare providers should help patients find insulin delivery that corresponds to individual preferences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17288697     DOI: 10.1185/030079906X167381

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin        ISSN: 0300-7995            Impact factor:   2.580


  6 in total

Review 1.  Controlled delivery systems: from pharmaceuticals to cells and genes.

Authors:  Elizabeth Rosado Balmayor; Helena Sepulveda Azevedo; Rui L Reis
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2011-03-19       Impact factor: 4.200

2.  Exploring patients' perceptions for insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: a Brazilian and Canadian qualitative study.

Authors:  Camila Guimarães; Carlo A Marra; Sabrina Gill; Graydon Meneilly; Scot Simpson; Ana Lpc Godoy; Maria Cristina Foss de; Regina Hc Queiroz; Larry Lynd
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 2.711

Review 3.  Inhaled insulin for controlling blood glucose in patients with diabetes.

Authors:  Bernard L Silverman; Christopher J Barnes; Barbara N Campaigne; Douglas B Muchmore
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2007

4.  Development of the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) and Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ).

Authors:  Louis S Matza; Kristina S Boye; Katie D Stewart; Rosirene Paczkowski; Jessica Jordan; Lindsey T Murray
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2018-09-12

5.  Psychometric evaluation of the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) and Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ).

Authors:  Louis S Matza; Katie D Stewart; Rosirene Paczkowski; Karin S Coyne; Brooke Currie; Kristina S Boye
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2018-09-19

Review 6.  A Systematic Review of Patients' Perspectives on the Subcutaneous Route of Medication Administration.

Authors:  Colin H Ridyard; Dalia M M Dawoud; Lorna V Tuersley; Dyfrig A Hughes
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 3.883

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.