...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology >Different Injection Frequencies of Basal Insulins in Type 2 Diabetes Patients under Real-Life Conditions: A Retrospective Database Analysis
【24h】

Different Injection Frequencies of Basal Insulins in Type 2 Diabetes Patients under Real-Life Conditions: A Retrospective Database Analysis

机译:现实生活中2型糖尿病患者基础胰岛素的不同注射频率:回顾性数据库分析

获取原文
           

摘要

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.
机译:目的:对2型糖尿病初级保健患者常规使用基础胰岛素[甘精,地特米尔,中性鱼精蛋白哈格多恩(NPH)]知之甚少。目的是比较基础支持口服治疗(BOT)和基础推注治疗[强化传统治疗(ICT)]方案在初级保健实践中2型糖尿病中基础胰岛素的注射频率。方法:回顾性分析了4211个甘精胰岛素(BOT / ICT,2247/1964),1290特米尔(490/800)和3876 NPH(1331/2425)胰岛素使用者的初级保健数据(疾病分析器数据库,2009年5月至2012年4月) 。使用逻辑回归(每天注射> 1次)和倾向评分来调整各种混杂因素(年龄,性别,医师类型,剂量,体重指数,糖基化血红蛋白)。结果:总体而言,在甘精胰岛素使用者中观察到> 1天每天注射1次(BOT,6.2%; ICT,9.0%),低于地特米尔(总体,25.4%; BOT,22.0%; ICT,27.4%) )和NPH(25.4%; BOT,23.9%; ICT,27.2%)胰岛素(所有P <0.001)。与地特米尔(赔率比,0.26; 95%CI 0.22–0.32)和NPH-胰岛素(0.20; 0.17–0.23)相比,甘精胰岛素的> 1注射剂调整后的几率更低。在倾向得分匹配之后,对于BOT或ICT也发现了类似的结果。结论:甘精胰岛素的注射频率明显低于其他基础胰岛素。这些发现可能会影响患者报告的结局,生活质量,治疗满意度以及糖尿病治疗的经济方面。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号