4.7 Article

Impact of injection speed and volume on perceived pain during subcutaneous injections into the abdomen and thigh: a single-centre, randomized controlled trial

期刊

DIABETES OBESITY & METABOLISM
卷 16, 期 10, 页码 971-976

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dom.12304

关键词

diabetes; injection speed; injection volume; subcutaneous injections

资金

  1. Novo Nordisk A/S

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AimThe aim of this study was to assess pain associated with subcutaneous injection into the abdomen and thigh of different combinations of injection speeds and volumes. MethodsThe study was a single-centre, one-visit, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial in 82 adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes receiving daily injections of insulin or glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists. Participants received 17 subcutaneous injections (12 in abdomen, 5 in thigh) of saline at different injection speeds (150, 300 and 450 mu l/s), with different volumes (400, 800, 1200 and 1600 mu l), and two needle insertions without any injection. Pain was evaluated on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) (0 mm no pain, 100 mm worst pain) and on a yes/no scale for pain acceptability. ResultsInjection speed had no impact on injection pain (p = 0.833). Injection of larger volumes caused significantly more pain [VAS least square mean differences 1600 vs. 400 mu l, 72 mm (95% confidence interval - CI; 4.6-9.7; p < 0.0001); 1600 vs. 800 mu l, 7.2 mm (4.4-10.0; p < 0.0001); 1200 vs. 400 mu l, 3.5 mm (0.4-6.6; p = 0.025) and 1200 vs. 800 mu l, 3.6 mm (0.4-6.7; p = 0.027)]. Significantly more pain occurred in the thigh versus the abdomen [9.0 mm (6.7-11.3; p < 0.0001)]. ConclusionsInjection speed had no effect on injection pain, whereas higher injection volumes caused more pain. The results of this study may be of value for guiding patients to use the appropriate injection site and technique to reduce their injection pain. Furthermore, these findings may have important implications for the development of new injection devices and drug formulations for clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据