![Sample our Bioscience journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5925/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Bioscience.jpg"})
Abstract
Background and objective: People with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) often interrupt basal insulin treatment soon after initiation. This study aimed to describe the experiences during and after basal insulin initiation among people with T2DM with different persistence patterns.
Methods: Adults with T2DM from France, Germany, Spain, UK, US, Brazil, and Japan were identified from consumer panels for an online survey. Respondents who initiated basal insulin 3–24 months prior to survey date were categorized as continuers (no gaps of ≥7 days in insulin treatment); interrupters (first gap ≥7 days within 6 months of initiation and restarted insulin); and discontinuers (stopped insulin for ≥7 days within 6 months of initiation without restarting).
Results: Among 942 participants, continuers were older than interrupters and discontinuers (46, 37, and 38 years, respectively, p < .01). Continuers reported having fewer concerns before and after insulin initiation than interrupters and discontinuers, while interrupters had the most concerns. Continuers also reported fewer challenges during the first week of insulin use. Continuers were more likely to respond that insulin use had a positive impact on specific aspects of life than interrupters and discontinuers, for example on glycemic control (73.0%, 63.0%, and 61.8%, respectively; p < .01 vs. continuers).
Conclusion: Among people with T2DM with different persistence patterns after basal insulin initiation there were significant differences in patient characteristics and experience during and after insulin initiation. Interrupters and discontinuers more frequently reported having concerns and challenges during the initiation process, negative impacts after initiation, and less improvement in glycemic control than continuers.
Transparency
Declaration of funding
Funding for this research was provided by Eli Lilly and Company and Boehringer Ingelheim.
Author contributions: M.P.-N., J.I.I., I.H., C.Z., D.C., S.Ka. and M.P. were involved in the conception and design of this study. L.S., S.Ki, and C.Z. were involved in the analysis of the data. All authors were involved in the interpretation of the data and in revising the manuscript critically for intellectual content, provided a final approval of the version to be published, and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Declaration of financial/other relationships
M.P.-N., D.C., S.Ka., A.M.D. and I.H. have disclosed that they are employees of Eli Lilly and Company. J.I.I., L.S. and H.G.B. have disclosed that they are employees of Analysis Group Inc., which has received research funding from Eli Lilly and Company. S.Ki. and C.Z. have disclosed that they were employees of Analysis Group Inc. at the time of the study. M.P. has disclosed that he has received consultancy fees from Astra Zeneca, Calibra, Lilly, and Novo Nordisk, lecture fees from Lilly and Novo Nordisk, and has served on the Scientific Advisory Boards of Calibra, Lilly, and Novo Nordisk. The sponsors, Eli Lilly and Company and Boehringer Ingelheim, reviewed and provided comments on this article. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.
CMRO peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.
Acknowledgements
Medical writing assistance was provided by Ana Bozas PhD, a former employee of Analysis Group Inc.