The Barmer study: impact of standardized warming of the injection site to enhance insulin absorption and reduce prandial insulin requirements and hypoglycemia in obese patients with diabetes mellitus. (May 2014)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- The Barmer study: impact of standardized warming of the injection site to enhance insulin absorption and reduce prandial insulin requirements and hypoglycemia in obese patients with diabetes mellitus. (May 2014)
- Main Title:
- The Barmer study: impact of standardized warming of the injection site to enhance insulin absorption and reduce prandial insulin requirements and hypoglycemia in obese patients with diabetes mellitus
- Authors:
- Pfützner, A.
Hermanns, N.
Funke, K.
Forst, T.
Behnke, T.
Bitton, G.
Nagar, R.
Raz, I.
Haak, T. - Abstract:
- <abstract> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="ss1"> <title>Background:</title> <p>The primary objective of this prospective controlled study was to investigate the impact of standardized injection-site warming on prandial rapid acting insulin dose and glycemic control when studied under real-world conditions.</p> </sec> <sec id="ss2"> <title>Methods:</title> <p>All 145 participating patients (51 female, 94 male, 13 type 1 and 132 type 2 patients, age: 61.6 ± 8.4 yrs, HbA1c: 7.19 ± 0.50%) were treated with intensive insulin glargine and short-acting insulin analog therapy. After a 4 week treatment optimization run-in period, patients were randomized to continue therapy for three months without (control) or with a local injection-site warming device (InsuPad<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn1">*</xref>). Observation parameters included HbA1c, insulin dose, frequency of hypoglycemia, body weight and adverse events.</p> </sec> <sec id="ss3"> <title>Results:</title> <p>HbA1c improved in both arms until study end (control group: 6.3 ± 0.5%; injection-site warming device: 6.3 ± 0.5%; both <italic>p</italic> &lt; 0.001 vs. baseline). To achieve this good control, patients in the control group needed to increase the daily prandial insulin dose by 8.1% (from 66 ± 31 U to 71 ± 38 U, <italic>p</italic> &lt; 0.05) with stable basal insulin requirements. Patients who used the injection-site warming device required less prandial insulin (70 ± 43 U to 55 ± 34 U; −19%, <italic>p</italic> &lt; 0.001)<abstract> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="ss1"> <title>Background:</title> <p>The primary objective of this prospective controlled study was to investigate the impact of standardized injection-site warming on prandial rapid acting insulin dose and glycemic control when studied under real-world conditions.</p> </sec> <sec id="ss2"> <title>Methods:</title> <p>All 145 participating patients (51 female, 94 male, 13 type 1 and 132 type 2 patients, age: 61.6 ± 8.4 yrs, HbA1c: 7.19 ± 0.50%) were treated with intensive insulin glargine and short-acting insulin analog therapy. After a 4 week treatment optimization run-in period, patients were randomized to continue therapy for three months without (control) or with a local injection-site warming device (InsuPad<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn1">*</xref>). Observation parameters included HbA1c, insulin dose, frequency of hypoglycemia, body weight and adverse events.</p> </sec> <sec id="ss3"> <title>Results:</title> <p>HbA1c improved in both arms until study end (control group: 6.3 ± 0.5%; injection-site warming device: 6.3 ± 0.5%; both <italic>p</italic> &lt; 0.001 vs. baseline). To achieve this good control, patients in the control group needed to increase the daily prandial insulin dose by 8.1% (from 66 ± 31 U to 71 ± 38 U, <italic>p</italic> &lt; 0.05) with stable basal insulin requirements. Patients who used the injection-site warming device required less prandial insulin (70 ± 43 U to 55 ± 34 U; −19%, <italic>p</italic> &lt; 0.001) and slightly more basal insulin (+3.9%). Total daily insulin dose increased in the control group (+3.7%) and decreased with warming device use (−8.6%, <italic>p</italic> &lt; 0.001). The number of hypoglycemic events (&lt;63 mg/dL) during the observation period was higher in the control group (6.2 ± 9.9/patient vs. injection-site warming device: 3.3 ± 4.8/patient, <italic>p</italic> &lt; 0.05). Main study limitations can be seen in the open label design reliability of the collected dose information and the very obese patient cohort.</p> </sec> <sec id="ss4"> <title>Conclusion:</title> <p>When treating obese patients to target with insulin therapy, use of an injection-site warming device for 3 months resulted in a lower frequency of hypoglycemic events and a reduction in prandial insulin analog requirements. If these results are confirmed in other patient populations, an injection-site warming device may be useful in achieving treatment targets with a safer and more efficient basal bolus therapy in insulin-treated patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.</p> </sec> </abstract> … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Current medical research and opinion. Volume 30:Number 5(2014:May)
- Journal:
- Current medical research and opinion
- Issue:
- Volume 30:Number 5(2014:May)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 30, Issue 5 (2014)
- Year:
- 2014
- Volume:
- 30
- Issue:
- 5
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2014-0030-0005-0000
- Page Start:
- 753
- Page End:
- 760
- Publication Date:
- 2014-05
- Subjects:
- Clinical medicine -- Periodicals
Therapeutics -- Periodicals
615.5 - Journal URLs:
- http://informahealthcare.com ↗
- DOI:
- 10.1185/03007995.2014.880049 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 0300-7995
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 3500.301000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 3261.xml