Patient treatment satisfaction after switching to NovoMix® 30 (BIAsp 30) in the IMPROVE™ study: an analysis of the influence of prior and current treatment factors

Psychometric Properties of the Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in Patients with Diabetes, Arterial Hypertension and Heart Failure

Background: Satisfaction with medicines is crucial in indicating patient experiences with the treatment which impact medicine adherence and compliance. Aim: The aim of this research was to adopt a general measure of patients’ satisfaction with medicines, the Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire (SATMED-Q), to the Polish language (BMQ-PL). Materials and Methods: A total of 197 patients qualified for the research, with the following diagnoses: type 2 diabetes (n = 42), hypertension (n = 55) and heart failure (n = 100), aged 64.73 (SD = 13.27). The criterion-related validity was determined with the use of a Polish version of the Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were used. Results: The respondents’ mean score was 73.63 (SD = 18.42). Cronbach’s alpha for the entire instrument was 0.847. All items of the questionnaire were found to have a positive item–total correlation. A multifactorial linear regression model showed that a significant (p ˂ 0.05) independent variable increasing the SATMED-Q score for the whole group was educational level (vocational education R = 14.576; secondary education R = 14.055; higher education R = 19.372) and low adherence (R = −1.384) was a decreasing variable. Conclusions: The present findings indicate a high level of reliability and validity of the translated SATMED-Q questionnaire, fully comparable to that of the original. The questionnaire can be used for the assessment of satisfaction with medicines among Polish patients.

Measuring the burden of treatment for chronic disease: implications of a scoping review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Although there has been growing research on the burden of treatment, the current state of evidence on measuring this concept is unknown. This scoping review aimed to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge as well as clear recommendations for future research, within the context of chronic disease.

METHODS

Four health-based databases, Scopus, CINAHL, Medline, and PsychInfo, were comprehensively searched for peer-reviewed articles published between the periods of 2000-2016. Titles and abstracts were independently read by two authors. All discrepancies between the authors were resolved by a third author. Data was extracted using a standardized proforma and a comparison analysis was used in order to explore the key treatment burden measures and categorize them into three groups.

RESULTS

Database searching identified 1458 potential papers. After removal of duplications, and irrelevant articles by title, 1102 abstracts remained. An additional 22 papers were added via snowball searching. In the end, 101 full papers were included in the review. A large number of the studies involved quantitative measures and conceptualizations of treatment burden (n = 64; 63.4%), and were conducted in North America (n = 49; 48.5%). There was significant variation in how the treatment burden experienced by those with chronic disease was operationalized and measured.

CONCLUSION

Despite significant work, there is still much ground to cover to comprehensively measure treatment burden for chronic disease. Greater qualitative focus, more research with cultural and minority populations, a larger emphasis on longitudinal studies and the consideration of the potential effects of "identity" on treatment burden, should be considered.

Practical Considerations for the Use of Subcutaneous Treatment in the Management of Dyslipidaemia

Suboptimal drug adherence represents a major challenge to effective primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. While adherence is influenced by multiple considerations, polypharmacy and dosing frequency appear to be rate-limiting factors in patient satisfaction and subsequent adherence. The cardiovascular and metabolic therapeutic areas have recently benefited from a number of advances in drug therapy, in particular protease proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and incretin-based therapies, respectively. These drugs are administered subcutaneously and offer efficacious treatment options with reduced dosing frequency. Whilst patients with diabetes and diabetologists are well initiated to injectable therapies, the cardiovascular therapeutic arena has traditionally been dominated by oral agents. It is therefore important to examine the practical aspects of treating patients with these new lipid-lowering agents, to ensure they are optimally deployed in everyday clinical practice.

Switching from Biphasic Human Insulin to Premix Insulin Analogs: A Review of the Evidence Regarding Quality of Life and Adherence to Medication in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes is a growing public health concern. Effective use of therapies for this chronic disease is necessary to improve long-term prognosis, but treatment adherence can be difficult to promote in clinical practice, and insulin, in particular, can impact both positively and negatively on patients' quality of life (QoL). Currently, guidelines advocate for QoL as a treatment goal in its own right, with treatment decisions based on patient concerns regarding injection frequency and adverse events, as well as glycemic control. Successful insulin management ideally requires a regimen to replicate normal endogenous insulin release, and this was a key driver in the development of insulin analogs. These analogs have also been associated with lower hypoglycemia risk, lower levels of postprandial glucose excursions, better adherence, improved QoL, and higher patient satisfaction with treatment. Premixed insulin is prescribed for many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D), as it combines both prandial and basal treatment, reducing the number of injections. Evidence suggests that premixed insulin analogs have advantages over conventional premixed human insulin for T2D treatment, but the objective of this review was to assess the evidence that switching from a biphasic human insulin to a biphasic insulin analog regimen improves patient QoL.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

Biphasic insulin Aspart 30 vs. NPH plus regular human insulin in type 2 diabetes patients; a cost-effectiveness study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety, costs, and cost-effectiveness of biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) with NPH plus regular human insulin (NPH/Reg) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

It was a Single-center, parallel-group, randomized, clinical trial (Trial Registration: NCT01889095). One hundred and seventy four T2DM patients with poorly controlled diabetes (HbA1c ≥ 8 % (63.9 mmol/mol)) were randomly assigned to trial arms (BIAsp 30 and NPH/Reg) and were followed up for 48 weeks. BIAsp 30 was started at an initial dose of 0.2-0.6 IU/Kg in two divided doses and was titrated according to the glycemic status of the patient. Similarly, NPH/Reg insulin was initiated at a dose of 0.2-0.6 IU/Kg with a 2:1 ratio and was subsequently titrated. Level of glycemic control, hypoglycemic events, direct and indirect costs, quality adjusted life year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio have been assessed.

RESULTS

HbA1c, Fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and two-hour post-prandial glucose (PPG) were improved in both groups during the study (P < 0.05 for all analyses). Lower frequencies of minor, major, and nocturnal hypoglycemic episodes were observed with BIAsp 30 (P < 0.05). Additionally, BIAsp 30 was associated with less weight gain and also higher QALYs (P < 0.05). Total medical and non-medical costs were significantly lower with BIAsp 30 as compared with NPH/Reg (930.55 ± 81.43 USD vs. 1101.24 ± 165.49 USD, P = 0.004). Moreover, BIAsp 30 showed lower ICER as a dominant alternative.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being more expensive, BIAsp 30 offers the same glycemic control as to NPH/Reg dose-dependently and also appears to cause fewer hypoglycemic events and to be more cost-effective in Iranian patients with type 2 diabetes.

Drug-related risk of severe hypoglycaemia in observational studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus (DM) leads to multiple complications, including severe hypoglycaemia events (SHEs). SHEs can impact a patient's quality of life and compliance and may directly result in additional costs to the health care system. The aim of this review was to evaluate the risk of severe hypoglycaemia in patients with type 1 (T1) and 2 (T2) DM as observed in everyday clinical practice for various drug regimens.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of observational (retrospective or prospective) studies in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases that covered at least 100 children or adults with T1/T2 DM. In T1 DM, basal-bolus/pre-mix insulin (human or analogue) and insulin pump were reviewed, and in T2 DM, basal-bolus/pre-mix insulin (human or analogue), oral antidiabetic drugs supported with basal insulin (human or analogue), sulfonylureas in monotherapy, and combined oral treatment were reviewed. In order to estimate SHE rates, we extracted data on the time horizon of the study, number of patients, number of SHEs, and number of patients experiencing at least one SHE. We used a random effects model to estimate the annual SHE rate. We considered the risk for other antidiabetic medications in T2 DM to be negligible and the results of our main review yielded no observational data for premixes in T1 DM so they were assessed based on relative rates taken from additional systematic reviews. The study, being a desk research, did not involve any human subjects (including human material or human data) and no ethical committee approval was asked for. For the same reason there was no need to collect informed consent for participation in the study.

RESULTS

We identified 76 observational studies encompassing 707,722.30 patient-years. The estimated annual SHE rate varied from 0.168 (95 % CI 0.123-0.237) for insulin pump up to 1.628 for biphasic human insulin in T1 DM patients, and from 0.0035 for oral antidiabetic drugs up to 0.554 (95 % CI 0.157-7.534) for basal-bolus with human insulin in T2 DM patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review indicates that SHE rates differ between patients depending on treatment regimen. However, SHEs are also driven by other factors. Proper modelling techniques are needed to use various types of information in published studies.

A systematic review of patient-reported measures of burden of treatment in three chronic diseases

Background

Burden of treatment refers to the workload of health care and its impact on patient functioning and well-being. There are a number of patient-reported measures that assess burden of treatment in single diseases or in specific treatment contexts. A review of such measures could help identify content for a general measure of treatment burden that could be used with patients dealing with multiple chronic conditions. We reviewed the content and psychometric properties of patient-reported measures that assess aspects of treatment burden in three chronic diseases, ie, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure.

Methods

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid PsycINFO, and EBSCO CINAHL through November 2011. Abstracts were independently reviewed by two people, with disagreements adjudicated by a third person. Retrieved articles were reviewed to confirm relevance, with patient-reported measures scrutinized to determine consistency with the definition of burden of treatment. Descriptive information and psychometric properties were extracted.

Results

A total of 5686 abstracts were identified from the database searches. After abstract review, 359 full-text articles were retrieved, of which 76 met our inclusion criteria. An additional 22 articles were identified from the references of included articles. From the 98 studies, 57 patient-reported measures of treatment burden (full measures or components within measures) were identified. Most were multi-item scales (89%) and assessed treatment burden in diabetes (82%). Only 15 measures were developed using direct patient input and had demonstrable evidence of reliability, scale structure, and multiple forms of validity; six of these demonstrated evidence of sensitivity to change. We identified 12 content domains common across measures and disease types.

Conclusion

Available measures of treatment burden in single diseases can inform derivation of a patient-centered measure of the construct in patients with multiple chronic conditions. Patients should take part in developing the measure to ensure salience and relevance.

Burden of treatment for chronic illness: a concept analysis and review of the literature

CONTEXT

Treatment burden, the burden associated with the treatment and management of chronic illness, has not yet been well articulated.

OBJECTIVE

Using Rodgers' (1989, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 14, 330-335) method of concept analysis, this review describes the ways in which treatment burden has been conceptualized to define the concept and to develop a framework for understanding its attributes, antecedents and consequences.

METHODS

Leading databases were searched electronically between the years 2002 and 2011. To ensure the review focused on actual observations of the concept of interest, articles that did not measure treatment burden (either qualitatively or quantitatively) were excluded. An inductive approach was used to identify themes related to the concept of treatment burden.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty articles, identified from 1557 abstracts, were included in the review. The attributes of treatment burden include burden as a dynamic process, as a multidimensional concept, and comprising of both subjective and objective elements. Prominent predisposing factors (antecedents) include the person's age and gender, their family circumstances, possible comorbidity, high use of medications, characteristics of treatment and their relationship with their health-care provider. The most dominant consequences are poor health and well-being, non-adherence to treatment, ineffective resource use and burden on significant others. Furthermore, many of these consequences can also become antecedents, reflecting the cyclic and dynamic nature of treatment burden.

CONCLUSION

The findings underscore the need for researchers and health-care professionals to engage in collaborative discussions and make cooperative efforts to help alleviate treatment burden and tailor treatment regimens to the realities of people's daily lives.

Ten years of experience with biphasic insulin aspart 30: from drug development to the latest clinical findings

Biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) includes 30% soluble rapid-acting insulin aspart (IAsp) along with an intermediate-acting 70% protaminated IAsp that provides coverage of prandial and basal insulin in a single injection. As BIAsp 30 has been available internationally for 10 years, this review provides a comprehensive overview of the discovery of BIAsp 30, its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile, safety and efficacy outcomes from the clinical trial programme, 'real-life' clinical insights provided by observational study data, and cost effectiveness and quality-of-life information. These studies have demonstrated that BIAsp 30 once or twice daily is an appropriate option for insulin initiation. BIAsp 30 also provides a switch option in patients on biphasic human insulin (BHI). Switching from BHI to BIAsp 30 is associated with improved postprandial glucose (PPG) and reduced nocturnal and major hypoglycaemia, although daytime hypoglycaemia is higher with BIAsp 30. Intensification of BIAsp 30 can be achieved by increasing the number of daily doses up to three times daily with meals. Therefore, BIAsp 30 provides an intensification option for individuals who are not achieving control with basal insulin and would prefer the simplicity of a single biphasic insulin instead of progressing to a basal-bolus approach. BIAsp 30 has a simple dose-titration algorithm, which enables patients to effectively self-titrate their insulin dose. Cost-effectiveness analyses have demonstrated that BIAsp 30 is cost effective or dominant compared with BHI 30 or insulin glargine in a number of healthcare settings. In conclusion, BIAsp 30 offers a simple and flexible option for insulin initiation and intensification that provides coverage of both fasting and prandial glucose.

Patients' satisfaction with diabetes medications in one hospital, Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVES

The main aim of this study was to evaluate diabetic patients' satisfaction with their treatment. A secondary objective was to assess the relationship between treatment satisfaction scores and patient-related factors, if any.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study collected data from patients at a primary care clinic of a government hospital located in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia. Patients were recruited if they were ≥18 years of age, had type 2 diabetes, currently taking oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin or both, and able to read and write in Arabic. Satisfaction was measured using the Diabetes Medication Satisfaction (DiabMedSat) questionnaire.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-three patients completed the questionnaire. The participant mean age was 46 years (standard deviation [SD] = 11.2 years; range 18-75 years), and mean duration of the disease was 7.8 years (SD = 6.9 years). Over half of respondents (63%) reported that they were satisfied and only 16% were unsatisfied. Approximately 54% of respondents are interested in changing their diabetes medications. The overall satisfaction score was 59.56 (SD = 15.9). Mean scores for the burden, efficacy, and symptoms domains were 59.81 (SD = 15.7), 58.1 (SD = 22.6), and 60.77 (SD = 22.1), respectively. Treatment factors (eg, type of medication; P < 0.02) and adherence factors (eg, difficulty taking medications; P < 0.032) were independently associated with lower treatment satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Diabetes patients with difficulties in adherence to recommendations, as well as patients treated with insulin, require more attention in order to improve their treatment satisfaction.