ArticleFuture science OA2025
Comparing setup time and patient preferences for SCIg therapy: a head-to-head cross-sectional evaluation of two SC pumps.
Article in Future science OA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Values and preferences of patients with inborn errors of immunity and their caregivers: a systematic review.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study compares the setup time and steps of two different subcutaneous infusion pumps using a 50 mL prefilled syringe (or PFS).
methodsThis cross-sectional time and motion assessment followed by a survey gathered patient setup time, number of steps, and surveyed preference for the FREEDOM60
results89% reported faster setup times with the Pump A infusion system, resulting in time efficiency improvements. Fast and easy setup, portability, and minimal steps were highly valued and influenced patient satisfaction. Challenges included pump malfunction and complex setup. Patients preferred prefilled syringes due to ease and potential error reduction. Fast setup time was important for arthritis management, reducing stress, work accommodation, and caregiver assistance.
conclusionA significant majority (78%) of patients preferred Pump A over Pump B. It showed advantages in load/unload setup time, resulting in time savings and increased efficiency for SCIg therapy. Incorporating Pump A may enhance treatment adherence and satisfaction, improving outcomes in primary immunodeficiency (PID) management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.