Analysis of insulin injection pen use by people with diabetes mellitus: an integrative review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i11.32821Keywords:
Diabetes mellitus; Self care; Insulin.Abstract
Injector pens represent a major advance in the forms of insulin delivery, optimizing the treatment of DM. The vast majority of patients prefer injection pens as a means of delivering insulin because of their greater ease of use, confidence in dosing accuracy, and less injection pain. The main objective of this study is to analyze the preference regarding the use of injection pens by patients with DM. This is an integrative review, whose data were collected from February 27 to March 04, 2022 and the PUBMED, SciELO and LILACS databases were used. The following search strategies were carried out: “caneta injetora” AND “diabetes”; “injection pen” AND “diabetes”; “caneta injetora” AND “insulina” and “injection pen” AND “insulin”. Patients with DM choose injectable insulin devices based on confidence in delivering the correct dose, ease of selecting the correct dose, overall ease of use of the injection device, frequency of injections, and ease of transporting the device when injecting is required. out of home. Devices that are easy to handle and that induce a feeling of confidence about accurate and reliable injection have a higher acceptance rate. It is concluded that the existence of different models of injector pens allows the user to be able to choose the device that best suits him, taking into account his physical, financial and social characteristics.
References
Antinori-Lent, K. J. (2012). Analysis of Comparison of Patient Preference for Two Insulin Injection Pen Devices in Relation to Patient Dexterity Skills. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 6(4), 917–920. https://doi.org/10.1177/193229681200600424
Bode, A. (2008). Development of the SoloSTAR®insulin pen device: design verification and validation. Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery, 6(1), 103–112. https://doi.org/10.1517/17425240802636187
Boye, K. S., Jordan, J. B., Malik, R. E., Currie, B. M., & Matza, L. S. (2021). Patient Perceptions of and Preferences Between Characteristics of Injectable Diabetes Treatments. Diabetes Therapy: Research, Treatment and Education of Diabetes and Related Disorders, 12(9), 2387–2403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13300-021-01097-9
Brasil. (2017). Caneta para injeção de insulina No 256. Comissão Nacional de Incorporação de Tecnologias no SUS (CONITEC). http://conitec.gov.br/images/Relatorios/2017/Relatorio_CanetasInsulina_final.pdf
Flor, L. S., & Campos, M. R. (2017). Prevalência de diabetes mellitus e fatores associados na população adulta brasileira: evidências de um inquérito de base populacional. Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, 20(1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-5497201700010002
Fry, A. (2012). Insulin Delivery Device Technology 2012: Where are We after 90 Years? Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 6(4), 947–953. https://doi.org/10.1177/193229681200600428
Gudiksen, N., Hofstätter, T., Rønn, B. B., & Sparre, T. (2017). FlexTouch: An Insulin Pen-Injector with a Low Activation Force Across Different Insulin Formulations, Needle Technologies, and Temperature Conditions. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 19(10), 603–607. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2017.0121
Lange, J., Bradley, N., & Richard, P. (2014). Usability of devices for self-injection: results of a formative study on a new disposable pen injector. Medical Devices: Evidence and Research, 7, 195. https://doi.org/10.2147/mder.s63918
Luis, D. A., Aller, R., Cuellar, L., Terroba, M. C., Ovalle, H. F., Izaola, O., & Romero, E. (2004). Effect on quality of life with a new insulin injection device in elderly patients with diabetes mellitus type 2. Journal of Diabetes and Its Complications, 18(4), 216–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1056-8727(03)00089-8
Maia, F. F. R., & Araújo, L. R. (2002). Uso da caneta injetora de insulina no tratamento do diabetes mellitus tipo 1. Jornal de Pediatria, 78(3), 189–192. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0021-75572002000300004
Ristic, S., Bates, P. C., Martin, J. M., & Llewelyn, J. A. (2002). Acceptability of a reusable insulin pen, HumaPen Ergo, by patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 18(2), 68–71. https://doi.org/10.1185/030079902125000327
Santos, S. S., Nascimento, W. R., & Morais, Y. de J. (2021). Papel da glicemia capilar no controle do Diabetes mellitus do tipo 2. Research, Society and Development, 10(13), e495101321540. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i13.21540
Schipper, C., Musholt, P., Niemeyer, M., Qvist, M., Löffler, A., Forst, T., & Pfützner, A. (2012). Patient device assessment evaluation of two insulin injection devices in a mixed cohort of insulin-treated patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 28(8), 1297–1303. https://doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2012.708325
Sousa, L. M. M., Furtado Firmino, C., Alves Marques-Vieira, C. M., Silva Pedro Severino, S., & Castelão Figueira Carlos Pestana, H. (2018). Revisões da literatura científica: tipos, métodos e aplicações em enfermagem. Revista Portuguesa de Enfermagem de Reabilitação, 1(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.33194/rper.2018.v1.n1.07.4391
Sousa, L. M. M., Marques-Vieira, C. M. A., Severino, S. S. P. & Antunes, A. V. (2017). Metodologia de Revisão Integrativa da Literatura em Enfermagem. Revista Investigação Enfermagem, Ser. II(21), 17-26. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12253/1311
Summers, K., Szeinbach, S., & Lenox, S. (2004). Preference for insulin delivery systems among current insulin users and nonusers. Clinical Therapeutics, 26(9), 1498–1505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2004.09.009
Szeinbach, S. L., Barnes, J. H., Summers, K. H., & Lenox, S. M. (2004). Development of an instrument to assess expectations of and preference for an insulin injection pen compared with the vial and syringe. Clinical Therapeutics, 26(4), 590–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2918(04)90061-6
Vargas, D. M., Zeni, A. L. B., Muller, A. L., & Da Silva, C. R. L. D. (2019). O uso da caneta injetora de insulina no cotidiano: percepções do adolescente. Ciência & Saúde, 12(3), 33426. https://doi.org/10.15448/1983-652x.2019.3.33426
Venekamp, W. J. R. R., Kerr, L., Dowsett, S. A., Johnson, P. A., Wimberley, D., McKenzie, C., Malone, J., & Milicevic, Z. (2006). Functionality and acceptability of a new electronic insulin injection pen with a memory feature. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 22(2), 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1185/030079906X80477
Warren, M. L., Brod, M., Håkan-Bloch, J., Sparre, T., & Chaykin, L. B. (2019). Patient-reported outcomes from a randomized, crossover trial comparing a pen injector with insulin degludec versus a pen injector with insulin glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 35(9), 1623–1629. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2019.1605769
Yakushiji, F., Fujita, H., Terayama, Y., Yasuda, M., Nagasawa, K., Shimojo, M., Taniguchi, K., Fujiki, K., Tomiyama, J., & Kinoshita, H. (2010). The best insulin injection pen device for caregivers: results of injection trials using five insulin injection devices. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 12(2), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2009.0110
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Daiyane Aparecida Franciskievicz; Steffany Araujo Soares; Marcos Vinícios Ferreira dos Santos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
