Literature DB >> 23621793

Comparison between shorter straight and thinner microtapered insulin injection needles.

Yoshio Nagai1, Toshihiko Ohshige, Kaori Arai, Hidetoshi Kobayashi, Yukiyoshi Sada, Shintaro Ohmori, Kentaro Furukawa, Hiroyuki Kato, Takehiro Kawata, Akio Ohta, Yasushi Tanaka.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many diabetes patients who require insulin perform multiple subcutaneous injections every day that often cause pain, discomfort, and anxiety. We compared efficacy (glycemic control) and patient preference for two types of needle: a shorter straight needle (32 gauge×4 mm, straight wall; Nippon Becton Dickinson Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; hereafter referred to as BD32S4) and a thinner microtapered needle (33-gauge tip and 28-gauge base×5 mm, double-tapered wall; Terumo Corp., Tokyo, Japan; hereafter referred to as TR33T5) in a single-center study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-four patients with diabetes were enrolled in a randomized, open-label crossover trial. The patients injected their usual insulin dosage with one type of needle for 4 weeks and then switched to the other type for the next 4 weeks. The serum glycated albumin level was measured before and after each 4-week period. Each patient assessed pain during injection on a 150-mm visual analog scale (VAS). Needle preference, perceptions of handling, and acceptance were assessed by the patients, who completed a questionnaire after using each type of needle for 4 weeks.
RESULTS: In total, 79 patients completed the study. There was no difference of glycemic control between the two needles. The mean VAS score was -14.5 mm (95% confidence interval, -20.9, -8.0 mm), indicating that the patients perceived less pain with the BD32S4 needle. In the overall evaluation, a significantly higher percentage of patients selected the BD32S4 as the better needle compared with the TR33T5 (60.3% vs. 19.2%; P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The BD32S4 needle was more highly evaluated and was preferred by the patients with respect to pain during injection, usability, and visual impression, without having a negative impact on glycemic control. The overall preference of patients for the shorter needle in this study suggests that needle length may be one of the major contributing factors for patients' comfort in insulin injection, although the other relevant factors of needles still need to be considered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23621793     DOI: 10.1089/dia.2012.0334

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther        ISSN: 1520-9156            Impact factor:   6.118


  12 in total

1.  Skin blood perfusion and cellular response to insertion of insulin pen needles with different diameters.

Authors:  Kezia Ann Præstmark; Casper Bo Jensen; Bente Stallknecht; Nils Berg Madsen; Jonas Kildegaard
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-04-17

2.  Subcutaneous Injection Depth Does Not Affect the Pharmacokinetics or Glucodynamics of Insulin Lispro in Normal Weight or Healthy Obese Subjects.

Authors:  Amparo de la Peña; Kwee P Yeo; Helle Linnebjerg; Edward Catton; Shobha Reddy; Patricia Brown-Augsburger; Linda Morrow; Debra A Ignaut
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-02-19

Review 3.  Recognition of and steps to mitigate anxiety and fear of pain in injectable diabetes treatment.

Authors:  Davida F Kruger; Susan LaRue; Phil Estepa
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 3.168

4.  Indian Injection Technique Study: Population Characteristics and Injection Practices.

Authors:  Sanjay Kalra; Ambrish Mithal; Rakesh Sahay; Mathew John; A G Unnikrishnan; Banshi Saboo; Sujoy Ghosh; Debmalya Sanyal; Laurence J Hirsch; Vandita Gupta; Kenneth W Strauss
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 2.945

5.  A comparison study of patient ratings and safety of 32- and 34-gauge insulin pen needles.

Authors:  Satoru Yamada; Yoshifumi Yamada; Yoko Tsukamoto; Mitsuhisa Tabata; Junichiro Irie
Journal:  Diabetol Int       Date:  2015-10-28

Review 6.  NovoPen Echo(®) insulin delivery device.

Authors:  Jacob Hyllested-Winge; Thomas Sparre; Line Kynemund Pedersen
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2016-01-07

Review 7.  Forum for Injection Technique and Therapy Expert Recommendations, India: The Indian Recommendations for Best Practice in Insulin Injection Technique, 2017.

Authors:  Nikhil Tandon; Sanjay Kalra; Yatan Pal Singh Balhara; Manash P Baruah; Manoj Chadha; Hemraj B Chandalia; K M Prasanna Kumar; S V Madhu; Ambrish Mithal; Rakesh Sahay; Rishi Shukla; Annamalai Sundaram; Ambika G Unnikrishnan; Banshi Saboo; Vandita Gupta; Subhankar Chowdhury; Jothydev Kesavadev; Subhash K Wangnoo
Journal:  Indian J Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug

8.  Insulin Injection Technique in China Compared with the Rest of the World.

Authors:  Zhenqiang Song; Xiaohui Guo; Linong Ji; Xiao Huang; Laurence J Hirsch; Kenneth W Strauss
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 2.945

9.  Turkish Insulin Injection Technique Study: Population Characteristics of Turkish Patients with Diabetes Who Inject Insulin and Details of Their Injection Practices as Assessed by Survey Questionnaire.

Authors:  Selcuk Dagdelen; Oguzhan Deyneli; Nermin Olgun; Zeynep Osar Siva; Mehmet Sargin; Sükrü Hatun; Mustafa Kulaksizoglu; Ahmet Kaya; Cansu Aslan Gürlek; Laurence J Hirsch; Kenneth W Strauss
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2018-06-30       Impact factor: 2.945

10.  Optimizing insulin injection technique and its effect on blood glucose control.

Authors:  Giorgio Grassi; Paola Scuntero; Rosalba Trepiccioni; Francesca Marubbi; Kenneth Strauss
Journal:  J Clin Transl Endocrinol       Date:  2014-07-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.