FlexPen® and KwikPen" prefilled insulin devices: A laboratory evaluation of ergonomic and injection force characteristics

Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology

Volumn 2, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 533-537

  Ignaut, Debra A ^a   Opincar, Michael ^a   Lenox, Sheila ^a  

^a ELI LILLY AND COMPANY   (United States)

Author keywords

Ergonomic; Glide force; Injection force; Insulin pen

Indexed keywords

EID: 70349352808     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19322968     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/193229680800200327     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Cobden D, Lee WC, Balu S, Joshi AV, Pashos CL. Health outcomes and economic impact of therapy conversion to a biphasic insulin analog pen among privately insured patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Pharmacotherapy. 2007;27(7):948-62.
2. Lee WC, Balu S, Cobden D, Joshi AV, Pashos CL. Medication adherence and the associated health-economic impact among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus converting to insulin pen therapy: an analysis of third-party managed care claims data. Clin Ther. 2006;28(10):1712-25.
3. Rubin RR, Peyrot M. Quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and treatment preference associated with use of a pen device delivering a premixed 70/30 insulin aspart suspension (aspart protamine suspension/soluble aspart) versus alternative treatment strategies. Diabetes Care 2004;27(10):2495-7.
4. Coscelli C, Lostia S, Lunetta M, Nosari I, Coronel GA. Safety, Efficacy, acceptability of a pre-flled insulin pen in diabetic patients over 60 years old. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1995;28(3):173-7.
5. Clarke A, Spollett G. Dose accuracy and injection force dynamics of a novel disposable insulin pen. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2007;4(2):165-74.
6. Haak T, Edelman S, Walter C, Lecointre B, Spollett G. Comparison of usability and patient preference for the new disposable insulin device Solostar versus Flexpen, Lilly disposable pen, and a prototype pen: an open-label study. Clin Ther. 2007;29(4):650-60.
7. Thurman JE. Insulin pen injection devices for management of patients with type 2 diabetes: considerations based on an endocrinologist's practical experience in the United States. Endocr Pract. 2007;13(6):672-8.
8. Summers KH, Szeinbach SL, Lenox SM. Preference for insulin delivery systems among current insulin users and nonusers. Clin Ther. 2004;26(9):1498-505.
9. Da Costa S, Brackenridge B, Hicks D. A comparison of insulin pen use in the United States and the United Kingdom. Diabetes Educ. 2002;28(1):52-56, 59-60.
10. Toraishi K, Yuizono Y, Nakamura N, Kato S, Aoki T, Ashida K, Sako Y. Force requirements and insulin delivery profiles of four injection devices. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7(4):629-35.
11. Liepmann D. Analysis: Actuation force requirements for glucose pens. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7(4):636-7.
12. Zwick Roell Instruction Manual for Materials Testing Machines, TC-FR2-5TS-D09. October 2005.
13. Martin JM, Llewelyn JA, Ristic S, Bates PC. Acceptability and safety of a new 3.0 ml re-usable insulin pen (HumaPen) in clinical use. Diabetes Nutr Metab. 1999;12(5):306-9.