Different injection frequencies of basal insulins in type 2 diabetes patients under real-life conditions: a retrospective database analysis

真实世界条件下2型糖尿病患者基础胰岛素注射频率的差异:一项回顾性数据库分析

阅读:1

Abstract

AIMS: Little is known about routine use of basal insulins [glargine, detemir, neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH)] in primary care patients with type 2 diabetes. The aim was to compare injection frequencies of basal insulins in type 2 diabetes in primary care practices, both for basal-supported oral therapy (BOT) and basal-bolus treatment [intensified conventional therapy (ICT)] regimens. METHODS: Primary care data from 4211 glargine (BOT/ICT, 2247/1964), 1290 detemir (490/800), and 3876 NPH (1331/2425) insulin users were retrospectively analyzed (Disease Analyzer database, May 2009-April 2012). Logistic regression (>1 daily injection) and propensity scores were used to adjust for various confounders (age, sex, type of physician, dosage, body mass index, glycosylated hemoglobin). RESULTS: Overall, >1 daily injections were observed in 7.5% of glargine users (BOT, 6.2%; ICT, 9.0%), which was lower than for detemir (overall, 25.4%; BOT, 22.0%; ICT, 27.4%) and NPH (25.4%; BOT, 23.9%; ICT, 27.2%) insulin (all p < .001). The adjusted odds of having >1 injection was lower for glargine compared with detemir (odds ratio, 0.26; 95% CI 0.22-0.32) and NPH-insulin (0.20; 0.17-0.23). Similar results were found for BOT or ICT and after propensity score matching. CONCLUSIONS: Glargine is associated with significantly lower injection frequencies than other basal insulins. These findings might impact patient-reported outcomes, quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and economic aspects of diabetes treatment.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。