Abstract
Background: to assess costs and safety of insulin pen devices and safety needles as compared to vial/syringes in hospitalized patients requiring insulin therapy in a General Hospital in Northern Italy. Materials and Methods: in a prospective 9-month study, consecutive patients admitted to three Hospital Units received insulin therapy through either a traditional disposable syringe method, or pen/safety needles with dual-ended protection, or disposable safety syringes. We compared the median direct (insulin and devices) and indirect (insulin supply at discharge, insulin wastage) costs of a 10-day in-hospital insulin treatment in the 3 study groups, additionally accounting for the costs related to the observed needlestick injury rate. Patients’ safety during in-hospital stay (hypo- and hyperglycemia episodes) and satisfaction were also assessed. Results: N=360 patients (55% men, mean age 75.6 years, 57% with DM since ≥10 years) were recruited in the study. Insulin pens had higher median direct cost than both traditional syringes (43 vs. 18 ϵ/patient, p<.0001) and safety syringes (21.5 ϵ/patient, p<.0001). However, when also indirect and injuries costs were taken into account, the estimated savings for using pens over traditional syringes were as high as 32 ϵ/patient (45.8 vs. 77.6 ϵ/patient, p-value <.0001). No differences in patients’ safety were observed. 74% and 12% of patients using pens and syringes would like to continue the method at home, respectively (p<0.0001). Discussion: A selective use of individual pre-filled pens/safety needles for patients who are likely to continue insulin therapy at home may strongly reduce hospital diabetes treatment related costs.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 460-467 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Current Diabetes Reviews |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Dec 1 2016 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
- Endocrinology
Cite this
A prospective study for introducing insulin pens and safety needles in a hospital setting. The SANITHY study. / Bossi, Antonio C.; Veronesi, Giovanni; Poerio, Carmine S.; Braus, Alessandra; Madaschi, Sara; Destro, Maurizio; Ferraro, Bruno; Gilberti, Lavinia; Sganzerla, Paolo; Davis, Estella M.
In: Current Diabetes Reviews, Vol. 12, No. 4, 01.12.2016, p. 460-467.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - A prospective study for introducing insulin pens and safety needles in a hospital setting. The SANITHY study
AU - Bossi, Antonio C.
AU - Veronesi, Giovanni
AU - Poerio, Carmine S.
AU - Braus, Alessandra
AU - Madaschi, Sara
AU - Destro, Maurizio
AU - Ferraro, Bruno
AU - Gilberti, Lavinia
AU - Sganzerla, Paolo
AU - Davis, Estella M.
PY - 2016/12/1
Y1 - 2016/12/1
N2 - Background: to assess costs and safety of insulin pen devices and safety needles as compared to vial/syringes in hospitalized patients requiring insulin therapy in a General Hospital in Northern Italy. Materials and Methods: in a prospective 9-month study, consecutive patients admitted to three Hospital Units received insulin therapy through either a traditional disposable syringe method, or pen/safety needles with dual-ended protection, or disposable safety syringes. We compared the median direct (insulin and devices) and indirect (insulin supply at discharge, insulin wastage) costs of a 10-day in-hospital insulin treatment in the 3 study groups, additionally accounting for the costs related to the observed needlestick injury rate. Patients’ safety during in-hospital stay (hypo- and hyperglycemia episodes) and satisfaction were also assessed. Results: N=360 patients (55% men, mean age 75.6 years, 57% with DM since ≥10 years) were recruited in the study. Insulin pens had higher median direct cost than both traditional syringes (43 vs. 18 ϵ/patient, p<.0001) and safety syringes (21.5 ϵ/patient, p<.0001). However, when also indirect and injuries costs were taken into account, the estimated savings for using pens over traditional syringes were as high as 32 ϵ/patient (45.8 vs. 77.6 ϵ/patient, p-value <.0001). No differences in patients’ safety were observed. 74% and 12% of patients using pens and syringes would like to continue the method at home, respectively (p<0.0001). Discussion: A selective use of individual pre-filled pens/safety needles for patients who are likely to continue insulin therapy at home may strongly reduce hospital diabetes treatment related costs.
AB - Background: to assess costs and safety of insulin pen devices and safety needles as compared to vial/syringes in hospitalized patients requiring insulin therapy in a General Hospital in Northern Italy. Materials and Methods: in a prospective 9-month study, consecutive patients admitted to three Hospital Units received insulin therapy through either a traditional disposable syringe method, or pen/safety needles with dual-ended protection, or disposable safety syringes. We compared the median direct (insulin and devices) and indirect (insulin supply at discharge, insulin wastage) costs of a 10-day in-hospital insulin treatment in the 3 study groups, additionally accounting for the costs related to the observed needlestick injury rate. Patients’ safety during in-hospital stay (hypo- and hyperglycemia episodes) and satisfaction were also assessed. Results: N=360 patients (55% men, mean age 75.6 years, 57% with DM since ≥10 years) were recruited in the study. Insulin pens had higher median direct cost than both traditional syringes (43 vs. 18 ϵ/patient, p<.0001) and safety syringes (21.5 ϵ/patient, p<.0001). However, when also indirect and injuries costs were taken into account, the estimated savings for using pens over traditional syringes were as high as 32 ϵ/patient (45.8 vs. 77.6 ϵ/patient, p-value <.0001). No differences in patients’ safety were observed. 74% and 12% of patients using pens and syringes would like to continue the method at home, respectively (p<0.0001). Discussion: A selective use of individual pre-filled pens/safety needles for patients who are likely to continue insulin therapy at home may strongly reduce hospital diabetes treatment related costs.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995572338&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995572338&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2174/1573399811666150806150210
DO - 10.2174/1573399811666150806150210
M3 - Article
VL - 12
SP - 460
EP - 467
JO - Current Diabetes Reviews
JF - Current Diabetes Reviews
SN - 1573-3998
IS - 4
ER -