ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Patient Experience and Improvement Opportunities in Self-Administered, Large-Volume Subcutaneous Infusions at Home.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 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
2 citing papers 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
- Mechanical versus Electronic Infusion Systems in Subcutaneous Immunoglobulin Therapy: A Structured Literature Review of Infusion-Site Reactions and Device Performance.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Subcutaneous (SC) administration is largely established as the preferred route to deliver biotherapeutics. Although the majority of approved SC products are limited to dose volumes ≤2.25 mL, there has been increasing industry focus on large-volume SC (LVSC) development. To date, however, there are few LVSC biotherapeutics available for self-administration, and subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg) remains the most established example. As a result, there is limited published literature on real-world practices with LVSC therapies to inform user needs and preferences for delivery device design attributes. Patients and Methods: This was a remote ethnography study of patients self-administering SCIg at home for treatment of primary immunodeficiency diseases (PIDD). Participants passively video recorded their preparation and infusion processes, took photos, and provided open responses to illustrate their overall experiences with their disease, infusions, and delivery devices. Qualitative data were compiled, analyzed, and grouped into themes and subthemes that represented participant responses and sentiments. Results: A total of 11 patients completed the remote study, all of whom were diagnosed with PIDD. Enrolled participants were currently infusing SCIg with one of five delivery devices and most also had previous experience with another delivery device. Emerging themes included universal preference for SC administration and pain points associated with managing medication/supply orders, storing medications/supplies, troubleshooting device issues, performing burdensome medication preparations, priming tubing/needles, inserting/securing needles, programming devices, adapting to device volume constraints, and loading reservoirs or tubing into delivery devices. Conclusion: Although patients prefer LVSC administration at home compared to the alternatives, the current SCIg use process presents a variety of challenges. While not all of these factors will apply to every LVSC scenario, these insights, along with their corresponding implications for device design, provide a framework to inform user needs for LVSC self-administration, anticipate obstacles during development of new LVSC therapies, and improve existing delivery devices.
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.