Cargando…

An Effective Intervention for Diabetic Lipohypertrophy: Results of a Randomized, Controlled, Prospective Multicenter Study in France

Background: Lipohypertrophy (LH) is highly prevalent and is potentially harmful to insulin-injecting patients. Methods: In this study, we assessed the impact of injection technique (IT) education, including use of a 4-mm pen needle on insulin-treated patients with clinically observed LH in a randomi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Campinos, Catherine, Le Floch, Jean-Pierre, Petit, Catherine, Penfornis, Alfred, Winiszewski, Patrice, Bordier, Lyse, Lepage, Marie, Fermon, Catherine, Louis, Jacques, Almain, Catherine, Morel, Didier, Hirsch, Laurence, Strauss, Kenneth W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5750448/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29058477
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/dia.2017.0165
Descripción
Sumario:Background: Lipohypertrophy (LH) is highly prevalent and is potentially harmful to insulin-injecting patients. Methods: In this study, we assessed the impact of injection technique (IT) education, including use of a 4-mm pen needle on insulin-treated patients with clinically observed LH in a randomized, controlled, prospective multicenter study in France with follow-up of 6 months. Intensive education and between-visit reinforcement were given to the intervention group. Control patients received similar messages at study outset. Results: A total of 123 patients were recruited (age 52.1 ± 15.7 years; men 70.7%; body mass index >30 kg/m(2): 34.2%; type 1: 53.7%; years with diabetes mellitus: 18.1 ± 10.5), of which 109 patients were included in the final analysis. The intervention group (n = 53) showed a significant decrease of total daily dose of insulin (average at baseline: 54.1 IU) at 3 months (T-3) and 6 months (T-6), reaching just over 5 IU versus baseline (P = 0.035). Corresponding, although not significant, decreases occurred in controls (n = 56); between-group differences were not significant. There were significant decreases in HbA1c (up to 0.5%) at T-3 and T-6 in both groups, with no significant differences between groups. A significant number of intervention patients improved their IT habits; about half achieved ideal IT habits by T-3 versus a quarter of control patients. By T-6, 2/3 of intervention patients achieved either ideal or acceptable IT habits, while only 1/3 of control patients did. Conclusions: Our intervention was effective in both study arms, however, to a greater degree and more rapidly in the intervention group. Widespread application of this intervention could be highly cost-effective.