• Toshinari Asakura, Toshinobu Yamazaki, Zhihong Cai, and Toshihiko Aranishi.
• Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Niigata University of Pharmacy and Applied Life Sciences, Niigata, Japan.
• Curr Med Res Opin. 2020 May 1; 36 (5): 765-769.

AbstractAims: Clinical data have shown that patients with diabetes require shorter training time to use Ateos versus FlexTouch. Using data acquired from a previous study, self-administration procedures that necessitated more time and repetition during mock injection were evaluated.Methods: In this open-label task- and interview-based crossover study, 48 self-injection naïve participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were randomized to 1 of 2 sequences to perform a mock injection of Ateos and FlexTouch into a rubber pad after receiving training. Time needed to conduct mock injection steps (preparation, pre-injection set-up, injection, clean-up), and the number and time needed for repeated steps due to procedural errors, were measured as post-hoc analyses.Results: Mean time for preparation, injection, and clean-up was shorter for Ateos (13, 15, 9 s) versus FlexTouch (96, 53, 36 s). Overall time for administration including repeated steps was 75 s for Ateos and 288 s for FlexTouch. Nine participants repeated procedures due to errors when using Ateos (preparation: 6; pre-injection set-up: 2; injection: 1), and 7 participants when using FlexTouch (preparation: 2; pre-injection set-up: 2; injection: 5). There was 1 repeat per person for Ateos injections versus multiple repeats for FlexTouch injections.Conclusions:Post-hoc analysis demonstrates the time needed for overall administration was shorter for Ateos than FlexTouch, and time for each procedure was shorter or similar for Ateos versus FlexTouch. Ateos was easy for participants with T2DM to learn with fewer repeated steps due to procedural errors, and easy for healthcare professionals to introduce to their patients.

27 keywords...

hide…