User experiences with second-generation 32-gauge × 4 mm vs. thinner comparator pen needles: prospective randomized trial

References

• Frid AH, Kreugel G, Grassi G, et al. New insulin delivery recommendations. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016;91(9):1231–1255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molife C, Lee LJ, Shi L, et al. Assessment of patient-reported outcomes of insulin pen devices versus conventional vial and syringe. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11(8):529–538.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lasalvia P, Barahona-Correa JE, Romero-Alvernia DM, et al. Pen devices for insulin self-administration compared with needle and vial: systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016;10(4):959–966.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peyrot M, Perez-Nieves M, Ivanova J, et al. Correlates of basal insulin persistence among insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes: results from a multinational survey. Curr Med Res Opin. 2017;33(10):1843–1851.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aronson R. The role of comfort and discomfort in insulin therapy. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012;14(8):741–747.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peyrot M, Rubin RR, Kruger DF, et al. Correlates of insulin injection omission. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(2):240–245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lteif AN, Schwenk WF. Accuracy of pen injectors versus insulin syringes in children with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1999;22(1):137–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korytkowski M, Bell D, Jacobsen C, et al. A multicenter, randomized, open-label, comparative, two-period crossover trial of preference, efficacy, and safety profiles of a prefilled, disposable pen and conventional vial/syringe for insulin injection in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus. Clin Ther. 2003;25(11):2836–2848.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey TS, Edelman SV. Insulin pen use for type 2 diabetes – a clinical perspective. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2010;12 (Suppl 1):S86–S90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luijf YM, DeVries JH. Dosing accuracy of insulin pens versus conventional syringes and vials. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2010;12 (Suppl 1):S73–S77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krzywon M, van der Burg T, Fuhr U, et al. Study on the dosing accuracy of commonly used disposable insulin pens. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012;14(9):804–809.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch LJ, Gibney MA, Albanese J, et al. Comparative glycemic control, safety and patient ratings for a new 4 mm × 32G insulin pen needle in adults with diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(6):1531–1541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibney MA, Arce CH, Byron KJ, et al. Skin and subcutaneous adipose layer thickness in adults with diabetes at sites used for insulin injections: implications for needle length recommendations. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(6):1519–1530.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch L, Byron K, Gibney M. Intramuscular risk at insulin injection sites – measurement of the distance from skin to muscle and rationale for shorter-length needles for subcutaneous insulin therapy. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014;16(12):867–873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo Presti D, Ingegnosi C, Strauss K. Skin and subcutaneous thickness at injecting sites in children with diabetes: ultrasound findings and recommendations for giving injection. Pediatr Diabetes. 2012;13(7):525–533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaag A, Handberg A, Lauritzen M, et al. Variation in absorption of NPH insulin due to intramuscular injection. Diabetes Care. 1990;13(1):74–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergenstal RM, Strock ES, Peremislov D, et al. Safety and efficacy of insulin therapy delivered via a 4mm pen needle in obese patients with diabetes. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015;90(3):329–338.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreugel G, Keers JC, Kerstens MN, et al. Randomized trial on the influence of the length of two insulin pen needles on glycemic control and patient preference in obese patients with diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2011;13(7):737–741.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch LJ, Gibney MA, Li L, et al. Glycemic control, reported pain and leakage with a 4 mm × 32 G pen needle in obese and non-obese adults with diabetes: a post hoc analysis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2012;28(8):1305–1311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz S, Hassman D, Shelmet J, et al. A multicenter, open-label, randomized, two-period crossover trial comparing glycemic control, satisfaction, and preference achieved with a 31 gauge × 6 mm needle versus a 29 gauge × 12.7 mm needle in obese patients with diabetes mellitus. Clin Ther. 2004;26(10):1663–1678.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch L, Gibney M, Berube J, et al. Impact of a modified needle tip geometry on penetration force as well as acceptability, preference, and perceived pain in subjects with diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6(2):328–335.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Joubert M, Haddouche A, Morera J, et al. Potential insulin underdelivery from prefilled and reusable insulin pens in cases of premature needle withdrawal: a laboratory evaluation. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2015;17(10):712–716.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Berardis G, Scardapane M, Lucisano G, et al. Efficacy, safety and acceptability of the new pen needle 34G × 3.5 mm: a crossover randomized non-inferiority trial; AGO 02 study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2018;34(9):1699–1704.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valentini M, Scardapane M, Bondanini F, et al. Efficacy, safety and acceptability of the new pen needle 33G × 4 mm. AGO 01 study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2015;31(3):487–492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aronson R, Gibney MA, Oza K, et al. Insulin pen needles: effects of extra-thin wall needle technology on preference, confidence, and other patient ratings. Clin Ther. 2013;35(7):923–933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rini C, Roberts BC, Morel D, et al. Evaluating the impact of human factors and pen needle design on insulin pen injection. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019;13(3):533–545.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Whooley S, Briskin T, Gibney MA, et al. Evaluating the user performance and experience with a re-engineered 4 mm × 32g pen needle: a randomized trial with similar length/gauge needles. Diabetes Ther. 2019;10(2):697–712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Praestmark KA, Jensen ML, Madsen NB, et al. Pen needle design influences ease of insertion, pain, and skin trauma in subjects with type 2 diabetes. BMJ Open Diab Res Care. 2016;4(1):e000266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garnero TL, Davis NJ, Perez-Nieves M, et al. Insulin non-persistence among people with type 2 diabetes: how to get your patients to stay on insulin therapy. Postgrad Med. 2018;130(4):394–401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemmingsen H, Niemeyer M, Hansen MR, et al. A prefilled insulin pen with a novel injection mechanism and a lower injection force than other prefilled insulin pens. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2011;13(12):1207–1211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar