Suppr超能文献

两种胰岛素预填充笔的给药准确性。

Dosing accuracy of two insulin pre-filled pens.

作者信息

Asakura Toshinari, Seino Hiroaki, Kageyama Miho, Yohkoh Noriaki

机构信息

Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Niigata University of Pharmacy and Applied Life Sciences, Niigata, Japan.

出版信息

Curr Med Res Opin. 2008 May;24(5):1429-34. doi: 10.1185/030079908x297394. Epub 2008 Apr 8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to determine the dose accuracy of two commonly available insulin pre-filled pens for use in diabetes - FlexPen (Novo Nordisk A/S, Bagsvaerd, Denmark) (FP) and SoloStar (Sanofi-Aventis, Paris, France) (SS).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Dosing accuracy was tested at 5 U, 10 U and 30 U doses - three previously unused pens of both pre-filled pens were used for each dose. At the 5 U dose each pen was tested 42 times, at the 10 U dose each pen was tested 25 times and at the 30 U dose each pen was tested 9 times. The pre-filled pens were used strictly according to manufacturers' instructions and measurements were made on a sensitive balance and corrected for the specific density of the insulin formulations used. Specified limits were based on ISO standards (+/-1 U for the 5 U and 10 U doses and +/-1.5 U for the 30 U dose).

RESULTS

FP was more accurate for injecting 5 U, 10 U and 30 U doses (absolute mean 4.95 +/- 0.19 U, 9.61 +/- 0.27 U and 29.70 +/- 0.34 U, respectively) than SS (absolute mean 4.86 +/- 0.39 U, 9.27 +/- 0.52 U and 28.73 +/- 0.47 U, respectively). No doses were outside specified limits for 5 U and 30 U with FP and 1.3% of doses were outside these limits at the 10 U dose. For SS; 1.6%, 29.3% and 33.3% of doses were below the pre-specified threshold for the 5 U, 10 U and 30 U doses, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This non-blinded comparison indicates that FP is a more accurate insulin pre-filled pen than SS at three different insulin doses. In this single-user study, FP delivered consistent and accurate doses of insulin but SS had a high frequency of under dosing. No assessment was made of user variability in this study.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定两种常用于糖尿病治疗的预填充胰岛素笔——优伴笔(丹麦诺和诺德公司, Bagsvaerd)(FP)和索乐笔(法国赛诺菲-安万特公司,巴黎)(SS)的剂量准确性。

研究设计与方法

在5U、10U和30U剂量下测试剂量准确性,每种剂量使用三支此前未用过的两种预填充笔。在5U剂量下,每支笔测试42次;在10U剂量下,每支笔测试25次;在30U剂量下,每支笔测试9次。预填充笔严格按照制造商说明使用,并在灵敏天平上进行测量,并根据所用胰岛素制剂的比重进行校正。规定的限度基于ISO标准(5U和10U剂量为±1U,30U剂量为±1.5U)。

结果

在注射5U、10U和30U剂量时,FP比SS更准确(绝对均值分别为4.95±0.19U、9.61±0.27U和29.70±0.34U)(SS的绝对均值分别为4.86±0.39U、9.27±0.52U和28.73±0.47U)。对于FP,5U和30U剂量下没有剂量超出规定限度,10U剂量下有1.3%的剂量超出这些限度。对于SS,5U、10U和30U剂量下分别有1.6%、29.3%和33.3%的剂量低于预定阈值。

结论

这项非盲法比较表明,在三种不同胰岛素剂量下,FP是比SS更准确的预填充胰岛素笔。在这项单用户研究中,FP能提供一致且准确的胰岛素剂量,但SS存在高频率的剂量不足情况。本研究未对用户变异性进行评估。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验