Comparative usability study for a certolizumab pegol autoinjection device in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

International Survey to Evaluate Current Options for Subcutaneous Injection of Methotrexate (MTX) and a New Button-Free MTX Autoinjector

Purpose

Prefilled syringes (PFS) and various types of pens are available for subcutaneous injection of methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or moderate to severe psoriasis. A new MTX pen with modernized button-free autoinjection technology was developed as a successor to a button-activated pen (metoject®/metex® PEN). To assess the needs of users and the relevance of features of the new MTX autoinjector an international online survey was performed.

Methods

A structured questionnaire was distributed to physicians, nurses and patients in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom. Participants received illustrations and information about features of the new MTX autoinjector.

Results

In total, 189 rheumatologists, 111 dermatologists, 90 nurses, and 180 patients answered the questions. Specific reasons for a preference for the use of MTX pens over PFS could predominantly be assigned to the categories "dosing/administration" and "ease of use". The first impression of the new MTX autoinjector was positive in 82% of physicians, 87% of nurses, and 76% of patients, respectively. The four most important features of the new MTX autoinjector were 2-step autoinjector mechanism (receiving a mean 14.1 to 18.1 chips of a total of 100 chips), small injection volume (9.7 to 11.7 chips), 10 different doses for dose flexibility (8.0 to 13.2 chips), and short injection time below 5 seconds (8.5 to 11.1 chips).

Conclusion

Arguments for the use of MTX pens as opposed to PFS predominantly refer to dosing/administration and ease of use. The new button-free MTX autoinjector combines a number of advantageous features identified by the international survey.

The Adherence and Outcomes Benefits of Using a Connected, Reusable Auto-Injector for Self-Injecting Biologics: A Narrative Review

Many biologics are now self-administered by patients at home. A variety of self-injection devices are available, including vials and syringes, prefilled syringes, and spring-driven prefilled pens or auto-injectors. Each has advantages and drawbacks, and different devices suit different patients. For example, some patients have difficulty achieving consistent and successful self-injection due to poor manual dexterity, or experience anxiety at the prospect of self-injection or injection-site pain. These factors can reduce patients' medication adherence and overall experience. Furthermore, while self-injection brings patients many benefits, the proliferation of single-use injection devices has implications for environmental sustainability, including the reliance on single-use plastics, repeated freighting requirements, and need for incineration as hazardous waste. Recently developed, innovative electromechanical auto-injector devices offer technological enhancements over existing devices to overcome some of these issues. Features include customisable injection speeds or durations, consistent rate of injection, electronic injection logs and reminders, and step-by-step, real-time instructions. Indeed, a growing body of evidence points to higher adherence rates among patients using electromechanical devices compared with other devices. Further, with time, the reusability of electromechanical devices may prove to lighten the environmental impact compared with disposable devices, especially as research continues to optimise their sustainability, driven by increased consumer demands for environmental responsibility. This narrative review discusses the differences between prefilled syringes, spring-driven prefilled pens, and electromechanical devices. It also explores how these features may help reduce injection-associated pain and anxiety, improve patient experience, connectivity and adherence, and drive sustainability of biologic drugs in future.

Customer-centric product presentations for monoclonal antibodies

Delivering customer-centric product presentations for biotherapeutics, such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), represents a long-standing and paramount area of engagement for pharmaceutical scientists. Activities include improving experience with the dosing procedure, reducing drug administration-related expenditures, and ultimately shifting parenteral treatments outside of a controlled healthcare institutional setting. In times of increasingly cost-constrained markets and reinforced with the coronavirus pandemic, this discipline of "Product Optimization" in healthcare has gained momentum and changed from a nice-to-have into a must. This review summarizes latest trends in the healthcare ecosystem that inform key strategies for developing customer-centric products, including the availability of a wider array of sustainable drug delivery options and treatment management plans that support dosing in a flexible care setting. Three disease area archetypes with varying degree of implementation of customer-centric concepts are introduced to highlight relevant market differences and similarities. Namely, rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, and oncology have been chosen due to differences in the availability of subcutaneously dosed and ready-to-use self-administration products for mAb medicines and their follow-on biologics. Different launch scenarios are described from a manufacturer's perspective highlighting the necessity of platform approaches. To unfold the full potential of customer-centric care, value-based healthcare provider reimbursement schemes that incentivize the efficiency of care need to be broadly implemented.

Technische Alltagshilfen in der Rheumatologie – Was ist sinnvoll, was ist bewiesen, welche Perspektiven gibt es?

Einschränkungen der Alltagsaktivität sind ein relevantes gesundheitliches Problem bei Patienten mit entzündlich-rheumatischen Systemerkrankungen. Technische Alltagshilfen nehmen in der Rehabilitation von diesen Teilhabeeinschränkungen einen hohen Stellenwert ein. Wir erläutern Evidenz für den Einsatz von Alltagshilfen und die neuen Entwicklungen auf diesem Gebiet.

Autoinjector - A smart device for emergency cum personal therapy

Autoinjectors are self-injectable devices; they are important class of medical devices which can deliver drugs through subcutaneous or intramuscular route. They enclose prefilled syringes or cartridges which are driven by a spring system. The major benefits of this device are easy self-administration, improved patient compliance, reduced anxiety, and dosage accuracy. Immediate treatment during emergency conditions such as anaphylaxis, migraine, and status epilepticus or for chronic conditions like psoriasis, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis, Reformulation of first-generation biologics, technical advancements, innovative designs, patient compliance, overwhelming interest for self-administration all these made entry of more and more autoinjectors into use. In this review, intensive efforts have been made for exploring the different types of currently available autoinjectors for the management of emergency and chronic diseases.

Autoinjector device for rapid administration of drugs and antidotes in emergency situations and in mass casualty management

There are several situations such as medical emergencies and incidents involving mass casualties where drugs and antidotes have to be administered immediately along with other first aid at the site of the event. Self-administration by the affected person or by a companion is required as a life-saving measure. Autoinjector devices (AIDs) are useful for the rapid administration of drugs and antidotes and they can also be used by those who have not been medically trained. This makes them very convenient for emergency and mass casualty management. An AID has a drug cartridge with an embedded needle for subcutaneous or intramuscular injection, which is usually painless. The drugs are delivered slowly by the AID across a large area in the muscle, which increases the absorption and the drug effects are equal to that of intravenous administration. A variety of AIDs are available, such as atropine and pralidoxime for nerve agent poisoning, epinephrine for anaphylactic shock and allergy, diazepam for seizures, sumatriptan for migraine, amikacin for antibacterial treatment, buprenorphine for pain relief and monoclonal antibodies for a variety of diseases. This review describes the published peer-reviewed literature identified by online searches of journal databases.

User-Centric Approach to Specifying Technical Attributes of Drug Delivery Devices: Empirical Study of Autoinjector-Cap Removal Forces

PURPOSE

The subcutaneous delivery of biologics using pre-filled autoinjector devices continues to attract broad scholarly interests. However, research still lacks a detailed understanding of user perceptions as the basis for specifying the clinically relevant technical attributes of a device, such as the cap-removal force. Therefore, this article studies the ability of users to remove the autoinjector cap, as well as the effects of the cap-removal force and user characteristics on the perceived ease of decapping.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-two participants among patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals removed the protective cap using non-functional devices with different target cap-removal forces between 25 N and 55 N. Data were collected on the ability of the users to effectively decap the device and their perceived ease of decapping. Linear regression was then applied to quantify the impact of the decapping force and patient characteristics on the perceived ease of decapping.

RESULTS

The participants of the study effectively decapped all autoinjector devices irrespective of age, sex, and dexterity impairments. Moreover, the study reveals that the perceived ease of decapping decreases significantly with increasing decapping force and participants' dexterity impairments.

CONCLUSION

The study provides initial empirical evidence on the ability of users to decap autoinjector devices and shows how increasing the cap-removal force and dexterity impairments reduce the perceived ease of decapping.

Usability of the Certolizumab Pegol Auto-Injection Device in Australian Patients with Chronic Rheumatic Diseases: Results from a Market Research Study

PURPOSE

To determine the usability of the ergonomically designed certolizumab pegol pre-filled pen (CZP PFP) in Australian patients with active ankylosing spondylitis, active psoriatic arthritis or moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

CZP-naive patients were recruited from six clinical centers in Australia between November 2018 and May 2019. Patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) reviewed training materials and completed pre-injection surveys; patients then self-administered ≥1 injection with the CZP PFP during each of three visits. Patients and HCPs then completed post-injection surveys. Some survey questions were adapted from the self-injection assessment questionnaire (SIAQ_v2.0).

RESULTS

Seventy patients participated (65 completed 3 visits); 33 were biologic-experienced. All patients agreed that training materials were informative; 94% found them easy to understand. Pre-injection, 89% of patients reported little or no anxiety about having injections; 67% (79% in biologic-experienced) were very confident about self-injecting the correct dose with the PFP. Ninety percent of patients were satisfied/very satisfied with their first experience with the CZP PFP; those with pre-injection anxiety reported lower satisfaction (43% vs 79% "very satisfied"). Confidence and satisfaction increased as visits progressed (for Visit 3 vs Visit 2: 69% vs 56% "very convenient"; 75% vs 67% "very confident"; 71% vs 57% "very satisfied"). All HCPs were confident in their patients' competence to self-inject and thought all patients had overall positive experiences.

CONCLUSION

Australian patients with chronic rheumatic disease reported high levels of confidence and satisfaction following initial use of the CZP PFP. The availability of devices with patient-centered design innovations may help overcome barriers to self-injection for improved adherence/outcomes.

Understanding and Minimising Injection-Site Pain Following Subcutaneous Administration of Biologics: A Narrative Review

Injection-site pain (ISP) is a subjective side effect that is commonly reported with the subcutaneous administration of biological agents, yet it may only be a concern to some. Multiple factors related to the product formulation, such as pH, volume and excipients, and/or to the injection process have the potential to contribute to ISP, while patient-related factors, such as low body weight, gender and age, can make an individual more susceptible to experiencing ISP. While total elimination of ISP remains unlikely with any subcutaneously administered agent, it can be minimised by helping the patient to develop a confident and competent injection technique via robust and effective training. Careful management of patient expectations along with open discussion regarding the potential risk of ISP may serve to minimise treatment-related anxieties and, importantly, allow the patient to remain in control of his/her treatment. Other interventions to help minimise ISP include psychological interventions, allowing biologics to reach room temperature prior to injection, using the most suitable injection device for the individual patient and selecting an alternative drug formulation, when available. Productive patient–physician communication remains important in order to support and optimise treatment experience and adherence, while also providing the opportunity for patients to discuss any ISP-related issues.

Patient Satisfaction with CIMZIA® (Certolizumab Pegol) AutoClicks® in the UK

INTRODUCTION

The CIMZIA^® AutoClicks^® pre-filled pen (CZP PFP) was developed to overcome barriers to self-injection, by improving self-injection confidence, reducing fear associated with needle use, and supporting patients with impaired dexterity. The purpose of this research was to gather feedback on injection experience and the usefulness of training materials.

METHODS

Eligible patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) were at least 18 years of age and initiated onto the CZP PFP. Routine self-injection training and support were provided by trained specialist nurses. Patient experience (pain and skin reactions, confidence, satisfaction, and ease of use) was evaluated at visits 1-3 using an amended version of the self-injection assessment questionnaire (SIAQ) v2.0. Nurse and patient feedback on the training materials, and nurse opinions on patient self-injection after self-injection at visit 1, were also collected.

RESULTS

Of 355 patients invited to participate, 196 provided informed consent and 79 participated in all three visits. Patients generally found the CZP PFP easy to use, and self-confidence and satisfaction were high. From visit 1 to visit 3, there was a numerical trend towards improvement in all three aspects of patient experience, most notably in both confidence and satisfaction. After self-injection at visit 1, confidence around safe patient self-injection was higher among nurses than among patients. Meanwhile, "pain and skin reactions" remained low at all visits. Patients thought the training materials contained sufficient information and were easy to understand and useful.

CONCLUSION

After training, patients generally found the device easy to use and showed high confidence and satisfaction with self-injection. Some patients may have been competent (based on nurse opinion), but initially lacked self-confidence. Increasing self-injection experience, together with patient training and continued support, may have facilitated high patient confidence and satisfaction, thereby potentially overcoming some of the barriers to self-injection.

A pilot study examining patient preference and satisfaction for ava®, a reusable electronic injection device to administer certolizumab pegol

Background: Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) adherence is suboptimal. ava®, a reusable electromechanical self-injection device (e-Device) developed for certolizumab pegol (CZP) administration, aims to overcome some barriers to increase adherence. This study evaluates patient experience of the e-Device and its training materials and determines patient device preference.Methods: CZP-treated patients were recruited from the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden. Patients completed a pre-injection Assessment of Self-Injection (ASI) questionnaire investigating self-injection perception. After training, patients administered 3 consecutive self-injections using the e-Device, patient experience of each was assessed using the post-injection ASI. An additional questionnaire evaluated training materials. After Injection 3, patients indicated their preference: the e-Device or their previous device.Results: 59 patients participated; most rated the e-Device highly for satisfaction, self-confidence and ease of use. The (negative) feelings and pain and skin reactions domains had low ratings. Post-injection ASI domain scores were similar following each of the 3 e-Device injections. Training materials were rated highly (video: 8.4/10; step-by-step guide: 8.4/10). 57.1% (32/56) patients preferred the e-Device over their previous self-injection device.Conclusions: Patients were satisfied with the e-Device and most preferred it over other self-injection devices. By improving patient experience, the e-Device may help increase medication adherence.

Adherence to subcutaneous anti-TNFα agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis is largely influenced by pain and skin sensations at the injection site

AIM

The aims of this prospective study were to determine the dimension of adherence in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving subcutaneously administered anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNFα) agents and to evaluate the influence of injection site pain and skin perceptions following subcutaneous administration of anti-TNFα drugs on patients' adherence.

METHOD

An inception cohort of patients starting subcutaneously administered anti-TNFα treatment was enrolled. Injection site pain perception was assessed through the Self-Injection Assessment Pain Questionnaire (SIAPQ), and adherence to treatment was ascertained by the Compliance Questionnaire for Rheumatology (CQR5). Associations between beliefs and non-adherence, and the influence of demographic (age, disease duration, educational level), clinical (body mass index, patient global assessment, physician global assessment, Numerical Rating Scale of pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, Simplified Disease Activity Index, and comorbidities measured by the modified Rheumatic Disease Comorbidty Index), and radiographic (Simple Erosion Narrowing Score) variables were assessed using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Adherence data over a 12-month interval were available for 193 patients. Of these, 21.7% reported non-adherence to anti-TNFα therapy. No difference (P = .383) was found for anti-TNFα drugs (adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab pegol and golimumab). In the logistic model, age (P = .0029), higher disease activity (P = .020), low numbers of comorbidity conditions (P = .0004), injection site pain and skin perception (P = .0008), were significantly associated with increased likelihood of medication adherence.

CONCLUSION

Adherence is influenced by both demographic characteristics (age) and clinical factors (disease activity, comorbidity burden and injection site pain and skin perception) in RA patients.

Patients' Perceptions and Preferences Regarding Two Different Forms of Methotrexate Autoinjectors for Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis: A European Crossover Survey

PURPOSE

Treatment adherence is crucial in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The device used by the patients for self-injections may influence adherence to methotrexate (MTX) treatment. A MTX-autoinjector has been recently marketed in Europe. This crossover survey compared this MTX-autoinjector (MTX-autoinjector A) and an already existing MTX-autoinjector (MTX-autoinjector B) from the patients' perspective.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 100 patients with moderate to severe RA using MTX-autoinjector A (N=35) or MTX-autoinjector B (N=65) were interviewed by an independent Global Market Research Company. Face-to-face interviews were performed using a computer-assisted personal interview system. Evaluation of the unfamiliar MTX-autoinjector was performed once the patients had received information, seen a demonstration, and performed a virtual testing.

RESULTS

A substantial advantage in favor of the MTX-autoinjector A was found with respect to all surveyed indicators. Respectively, 95% and 55% of the users of MTX-autoinjectors A and B claimed to be very or totally satisfied with their familiar MTX-autoinjector. With respect to several specific characteristics, 91% and 60% of the users of MTX-autoinjectors A and B were very or totally satisfied with their familiar MTX-autoinjector, 29% and 77% found the unfamiliar MTX-autoinjector better, and 26% and 73% were interested in trying the unfamiliar MTX-autoinjector. Injection mode (with no push button) and end-of-injection recognition system (with audible signal) were identified as key features explaining a stronger preference for MTX-autoinjector A.

CONCLUSION

Even though deserving further studying, these findings are expected to guide clinicians when prescribing or renewing prescription of MTX-autoinjector, in particular in poor or non-compliant patients. In a context of growing interest in shared decision-making, the objective would be to choose with each patient the best suited MTX-autoinjector, and ultimately, to obtain a better treatment adherence.

A portfolio of biologic self-injection devices in rheumatology: how patient involvement in device design can improve treatment experience

Biologic drugs (e.g. anti-tumor necrosis factors) are effective treatments for multiple chronic inflammatory diseases including rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, and psoriatic arthritis. Administration of biologic drugs is usually via subcutaneous self-injection, which provides many patient benefits compared to infusions including increased flexibility, reduced costs, and reduced caregiver burden. However, it is also associated with challenges such as needle phobia, patient treatment misconceptions and incorrect drug administration, and can be impacted by dexterity problems. Evidence suggests these problems, along with other drug administration challenges (e.g. patient forgetfulness, busy lifestyles, and polypharmacy), can reduce patient adherence to treatment. To combat these challenges, patient feedback has been used to develop a range of self-injection devices, including pre-filled syringes, pre-filled pens, and electronic injection devices. Providing different devices for drug administration gives patients the opportunity to choose a device that addresses the challenges they face as an individual. Research suggests involving patients in medical device development, providing patients with a choice of devices and enrolling individuals in patient support programs can empower patients to take control of their treatment journey. By providing a portfolio of self-injection devices, designed based on patient needs, patient experience will improve, potentially improving adherence and hence, long-term treatment outcomes.

From drug-delivery device to disease management tool: a study of preferences for enhanced features in next-generation self-injection devices

PURPOSE

To quantify rheumatology patient preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for features differentiating enhanced from standard self-injection devices and to investigate differences among subgroups.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) were recruited in the UK. A discrete-choice experiment was used to elicit preferences; respondents were presented with 10 choices between 3 different devices: a free standard disposable device, and 2 hypothetical reusable devices characterized by presence/absence of skin sensor, injection speed control, on-screen instructions, injection reminders, electronic log, and large grip. Every hypothetical device included a cost component to assess WTP for each enhanced feature. A random-parameters logit model was used to estimate preference weights and WTP.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 323 respondents by electronic survey (15/11/2017-15/02/2018; RA: 108; PsA: 103; axSpA: 112). On average, the skin sensor was the most preferred feature (£30), followed by injection speed control, injection reminders, electronic log (~£20 each), on-screen instructions (~£12), and a device with a small, rather than large grip (~£7). Similar preferences for attributes were observed across condition subgroups except for grip size: axSpA patients preferred small grip (~£27); PsA patients preferred large grip (~£19). Overall, respondents preferred reusable devices with all enhanced features (WTP value: £85) over the standard device. RA patients exhibited a higher WTP (£145) than PsA (£102) or axSpA (£62) for the same enhanced device.

CONCLUSION

Patients positively valued reusable self-injection devices with enhanced features, which may improve patient experience, potentially improving treatment adherence, clinical, and economic outcomes.

Using Patient Feedback to Optimize the Design of a Certolizumab Pegol Electromechanical Self-Injection Device: Insights from Human Factors Studies

INTRODUCTION

We incorporated patient feedback from human factors studies (HFS) in the patient-centric design and validation of ava^®, an electromechanical device (e-Device) for self-injecting the anti-tumor necrosis factor certolizumab pegol (CZP).

METHODS

Healthcare professionals, caregivers, healthy volunteers, and patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, or Crohn's disease participated in 11 formative HFS to optimize the e-Device design through intended user feedback; nine studies involved simulated injections. Formative participant questionnaire feedback was collected following e-Device prototype handling. Validation HFS (one EU study and one US study) assessed the safe and effective setup and use of the e-Device using 22 predefined critical tasks. Task outcomes were categorized as "failures" if participants did not succeed within three attempts.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-three participants entered formative (163) and validation (120) HFS; 260 participants performed one or more simulated e-Device self-injections. Design changes following formative HFS included alterations to buttons and the graphical user interface screen. All validation HFS participants completed critical tasks necessary for CZP dose delivery, with minimal critical task failures (12 of 572 critical tasks, 2.1%, in the EU study, and 2 of 5310 critical tasks, less than 0.1%, in the US study).

CONCLUSION

CZP e-Device development was guided by intended user feedback through HFS, ensuring the final design addressed patients' needs. In both validation studies, participants successfully performed all critical tasks, demonstrating safe and effective e-Device self-injections.

FUNDING

UCB Pharma. Plain language summary available on the journal website.

Chronic Disease and Self-Injection: Ethnographic Investigations into the Patient Experience During Treatment

Introduction

Drug administration by self-injection provides an option to treat chronic inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and Crohn’s disease (CD). However, a negative self-injection experience for patients may reduce patient adherence to the recommended treatment regimen. In this study, a holistic approach was used to identify common themes along the treatment pathway and at self-injection that, if changed, could improve patient experience and treatment outcomes.

Methods

Two ethnographic studies were conducted: Field Insights CODE (FI[CODE]) examined the treatment pathway within the context of the experience of living with RA or CD, and Injection Mission 2020 (IM2020) focused on the moment of self-injection. FI(CODE) used an open ethnographic approach to interview 62 patients and 10 healthcare professionals (HCPs) from the US and UK. IM2020 included a review of over 50 injection device design information sources from the sponsor, and interviews with 9 patients, 8 HCPs, and 5 medical device designers from the US, UK, Canada, and Japan.

Results

FI(CODE) identified suboptimal treatment practices along the treatment pathway in four key areas: treatment team communication, treatment choice, patient empowerment, and treatment delivery. Patients with more treatment options and greater disease understanding were less likely to struggle with the treatment process. IM2020 demonstrated that five related components influenced the self-injection experience: delivery process, emotional state, social perception, educational level, and ritualization of the self-injection process.

Conclusion

These analyses highlight several potential areas for improvement, including aligning the device more to patients’ needs to improve treatment adherence, better accessibility to educational resources to increase patient disease understanding, and guidance to empower patients to develop an optimal personalized self-injection ritual.

Funding

UCB Pharma.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40744-017-0080-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Some medicines used to treat long-term conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis or Crohn’s disease, are injected under the skin. Often, patients can choose to inject medicines themselves (self-injection). This must be done correctly for the medicines to work properly. But, the training surrounding self-injection is uneven and often cannot address the fundamental problems facing all self-injecting patients.

What healthcare improvements could help patients self-inject successfully? To find out, we interviewed people living with rheumatoid arthritis or Crohn’s disease, while others were doctors, nurses, and people who design injection devices.

We found four common problems in the overall healthcare that patients received:

There were communication problems between different healthcare professionals and between healthcare professionals and patients, for example about treatment options or goals.

Each level in the healthcare system (e.g., the nurse, doctor, hospital board, health insurance company) made decisions that limited how many treatment options were presented to patients for consideration.

Patients were not empowered, as they felt they lacked personal input, information, and control in treatment decisions.

Healthcare professionals focused on disease treatment but not patient experience; they did not fully explain how to perform injections (delivery), leaving patients to figure it out by trial and error.

In addition, five factors were identified that affected patients’ experiences of self-injection:

Process of injection: minimal one-on-one instruction for self-injection left some patients anxious and more prone to mistakes.

Emotions: some patients were better than others at ‘overriding’ emotions (e.g., fear) when self-injecting.

Views on injections: there was negative social stigma around injections, but patients had greater trust in more technological, modern devices.

Education: doctors often failed to explain how to manage fear and anxiety.

Developing a ritual: patients with a ritualized routine for when, where, and how to self-inject were more confident.

If doctors and nurses can support patients by providing a greater choice of treatments and injection devices, and teaching more about self-injection, this could improve patients’ experiences and allow medications to work better. Healthcare professionals should help patients to develop their own, optimal routine for self-injection.