American Diabetes Association
Browse
ds21-0108_Supplementary_Materials.docx (21.97 kB)

Comparison of the Usability, Accuracy, Preference, and Satisfaction of Three Once-Weekly Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist Pen Devices in People With Type 2 Diabetes

Download (21.97 kB)
figure
posted on 2022-06-29, 19:27 authored by Sara A. Wettergreen, Morgan P. Stewart, Katelyn Kennedy, Jennifer M. Trujillo

  

Aims. This study’s aim was to compare the time and accuracy of use and participants’ satisfaction and preferences with pen devices for the once-weekly glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists dulaglutide, exenatide XR BCise, and semaglutide. 

Materials and methods. In this triple crossover, open-label, simulated injection study, GLP-1 receptor agonist pen devices were compared, with time and accuracy of use and participants’ satisfaction and preferences as primary outcomes. Participants had type 2 diabetes and were naive to GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy. Participants watched instructional videos for each device, demonstrated administration, and then provided feedback after each demonstration. Investigators tracked errors and omissions of demonstration steps for accuracy and time. Differences across devices were compared using univariate mixed models, adjusting for multiple comparisons. 

Results. Of the 60 participants, 50% were male, a majority (65%) were Caucasian, and most (65%) had adequate health literacy. Participants rated the dulaglutide device easier to use than those of exenatide XR BCise or semaglutide (P <0.001 for each). Participants expressed greater satisfaction with the dulaglutide device compared to those of exenatide XR BCise or semaglutide (P <0.01 for each). Most participants (75%) preferred the dulaglutide device overall; however, many participants (61%) preferred the size and portability of the semaglutide device. The dulaglutide device took less time to use than the exenatide XR BCise or semaglutide devices (69 vs. 126 and 146 seconds, respectively; P <0.001 for each). Participants were less accurate when using the dulaglutide device. 

Conclusion. Most participants preferred the dulaglutide device. The dulaglutide device took the least amount of time to demonstrate; however, demonstration accuracy was lower. 

Funding

University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences - Department of Clinical Pharmacy Seed Grant

History

Usage metrics

    Diabetes Spectrum

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC