Faster Use and Fewer Failures with Needle-Free Nasal Glucagon Versus Injectable Glucagon in Severe Hypoglycemia Rescue: A Simulation Study

BACKGROUND

During severe hypoglycemic episodes, people with diabetes depend on others to help with treatment. We compared needle-free nasal glucagon and commercially available injectable glucagon for ease of use by caregivers of people with diabetes and by others in treating simulated episodes of severe hypoglycemia.

METHODS

Sixteen instructed caregivers and 15 noninstructed acquaintances administered nasal and injectable glucagon to manikins, simulating unconscious people with diabetes during severe hypoglycemia episodes.

RESULTS

With nasal glucagon, 15 caregivers (94%) and 14 acquaintances (93%) administered a full dose (mean time 0.27 and 0.44 min, respectively). One caregiver and one acquaintance did not administer nasal glucagon because they did not fully depress the plunger on the device. Two caregivers deliberately administered both insulin and nasal glucagon, believing that insulin would also help the patient. With injectable glucagon, eight caregivers (50%) injected glucagon (mean time 1.89 min), but only two (13%) administered the full dose. Three acquaintances (20%) injected a partial dose of injectable glucagon (mean time 2.40 min); none gave a full dose. Errors included injecting diluent only, bending the needle, and injecting with an empty syringe. Two caregivers and one acquaintance injected insulin because they confused insulin with injectable glucagon.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 90% of participants delivered full doses of nasal glucagon, while 13% and 0% of caregivers and acquaintances delivered full doses of injectable glucagon, indicating that nasal glucagon is easier for nonmedically trained people to administer. Thus, nasal glucagon has the potential to substantially improve treatment for patients experiencing a life-threatening episode of severe hypoglycemia.

Cost of Severe Hypoglycemia and Budget Impact with Nasal Glucagon in Patients with Diabetes in Spain

INTRODUCTION

Severe hypoglycemic events (SHE) represent a clinical and economic burden in patients with diabetes. Nasal glucagon (NG) is a novel treatment for SHEs with similar efficacy, but with a usability advantage over injectable glucagon (IG) that may translate to improved economic outcomes. The economic implications of this usability advantage on SHE-related spending in Spain were explored in this analysis.

METHODS

A cost-offset and budget impact analysis (BIA) was conducted using a decision tree model, adapted for the Spanish setting. The model calculated average costs per SHE over the SHE treatment pathway following a treatment attempt with IG or NG. Analyses were performed separately in three populations with insulin-treated diabetes: children and adolescents (4-17 years) with type 1 diabetes (T1D), adults with T1D and adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D), with respective population estimates applied in BIA. Treatment probabilities were assumed to be equal for IG and NG, except for treatment success following glucagon administration. Epidemiologic and cost data were obtained from Spanish-specific sources. BIA results were presented at a 3-year time horizon.

RESULTS

On a per SHE level, NG was associated with lower costs compared to IG (children and adolescents with T1D, EUR 820; adults with T1D, EUR 804; adults with T2D, EUR 725). Lower costs were attributed to reduced costs of professional medical assistance in patients treated with NG. After 3 years, BIA showed that relative to IG, the introduction of NG was projected to reduce SHE-related spending by EUR 1,158,969, EUR 142,162,371, and EUR 6,542,585 in children and adolescents with T1D, adults with T1D, and adults with insulin-treated T2D, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In Spain, the usability advantage of NG over IG translates to potential cost savings per SHE in three populations with insulin-treated diabetes, and the introduction of NG was associated with a lower budget impact versus IG in each group.

Comparison of Intranasal and Injectable Glucagon Administration Among Pediatric Population Responders

Aims: Ease of use and acceptability of nasal versus injectable glucagon (IG) among pediatric responders have been little investigated. This study compared the performance of administering nasal and IG in parents of youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and in school workers. Enablers and barriers associated with each glucagon and preferred glucagon administration learning modality were also evaluated. Methods: Three months after watching short pedagogical videos, 30 parents and 30 school workers performed simulated scenarios where they administered both glucagon. Completion time and successful execution of critical steps were collected. Interviews assessed preferred learning modalities, barriers, and enablers associated with each glucagon. Results: Both groups administered nasal glucagon faster than IG (median [interquartile range]: parents 19 [12-29] vs. 97 [71-117] s, P < 0.001; school workers 24 [16-33] vs. 129 [105-165] s, P < 0.001). A lower proportion of participants successfully executed all critical steps for injectable versus nasal glucagon (significant difference for school workers [53% vs. 90%; P = 0.007] but not for parents [68% vs. 83%; P = 0.227]). Nasal glucagon was preferred for ease of use and acceptability. Preferred learning modalities were a combination of videos and workshops, but videos alone could suffice for nasal glucagon. Conclusions: Nasal glucagon is faster to use, more likely to be successfully administered, and more acceptable than IG for parents of children with T1D and school workers. Nasal glucagon training with videos could improve school workers' involvement in severe hypoglycemia management. Clinical Trial number, URL to the registration: NCT05395000, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05395000.