Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25670847›Full record

Trial reportJournal of diabetes science and technology2015

Novel simple insulin delivery device reduces barriers to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: results from a pilot study.

Norbert Hermanns, Leslie C Lilly, Julia K Mader, Felix Aberer, Anja Ribitsch, Harald Kojzar, Jay Warner, Thomas R Pieber

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Addressing the Burden of Multiple Daily Insulin Injections in Type 2 Diabetes with Insulin Pump Technology: A Narrative Review.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Key Features of Insulin Delivery Devices for Type 2 Diabetes: Type 2.0 Booth Survey.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2020
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Norbert HermannsDiabetes Center Mergentheim, Research Institute Diabetes Academy Mergentheim (FIDAM), Bad Mergentheim, Germany hermanns@diabetes-zentrum.de.
Leslie C LillyCeQur Corp, Marlborough, MA, USA.
Julia K MaderDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Felix AbererDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Anja RibitschDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Harald KojzarDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Jay WarnerCeQur Corp, Marlborough, MA, USA.
Thomas R PieberDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe PaQ® insulin delivery system is a simple-to-use patch-on device that provides preset basal rates and bolus insulin on demand. In addition to feasibility of use, safety, and efficacy (reported elsewhere), this study analyzed the impact of PaQ on patient-reported outcomes, including barriers to insulin treatment, diabetes-related distress, and attitudes toward insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes on a stable multiple daily injection (MDI) regimen.

methodsThis single-center, open-label, single-arm study comprised three 2-week periods: baseline (MDI), transition from MDI to PaQ, and PaQ treatment. Validated questionnaires were administered during the baseline and PaQ treatment periods: Barriers to Insulin Treatment questionnaire (BIT), Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale (ITAS), and Problem Areas in Diabetes scale (PAID).

resultsEighteen patients (age 59 ± 5 years, diabetes duration 15 ± 7 years, 21% female, HbA1c 7.7 ± 0.7%) completed the questionnaires. There was a strong, significant effect of PaQ use in mean BIT total scores (difference [D] = -5.4 ± 0.7.7, P = .01, effect size [d] = 0.70). Patients perceived less stigmatization by insulin injection (D = -2.2 ± 6.2, P = .18, d = 0.35), increased positive outcome (D = 1.9 ± 6.6, P = .17, d = 0.29), and less fear of injections (1.3 ± 4.8, P = .55, d = 0.28). Mean change in ITAS scores after PaQ device use showed a nonsignificant improvement of 1.71 ± 5.63 but moderate effect size (d = 0.30, P = .14). No increase in PAID scores was seen.

conclusionsThe results and moderate to large effects sizes suggest that PaQ device use has beneficial and clinically relevant effects to overcoming barriers to and negative appraisal of insulin treatment, without increasing other diabetes-related distress.

Indexed as

AdultAgedDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinInsulin Infusion SystemsMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPilot ProjectsSurveys and QuestionnairesTransdermal PatchTreatment OutcomeGlycated HemoglobinHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinBITCSIIinsulin pumpsITASMDImultiple daily insulin injectionsPAIDtype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID25670847
PMCPMC4604549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.