<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>12(11)</volume><submitter>Chen J</submitter><funding>eli lilly and company</funding><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Introduction&lt;/h4>The study was designed to assess patient satisfaction, preferences and injection habits for patients using insulin lispro 200 units/ml pen (IL200) compared to their previously used disposable 100 units/ml mealtime insulin pen ("MTI-100 pen") in Germany.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>A site-based, cross-sectional study involving a self-reported survey and medical record extraction in patients with diabetes currently using IL200 for between 3 and 12 months and had previously used any disposable MTI-100 pen.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Of 114 patients included, 83.3% were satisfied with IL200 and 3.5% were dissatisfied; 70.2% preferred IL200 over their previous MTI-100 pen and 4.4% preferred their previous MTI-100 pen. The main reasons for IL200 preference were the amount of insulin the pen carries, longer use before discarding, number of non-empty pens discarded, injection volume and frequency replacing pens. Patients discarded (median) 4 IL200 pens per month with 5.3% discarding more than 10 units in their last pen. When insufficient insulin remained to complete a dose, 74.6% injected the remainder and completed with a new pen, 19.3% discarded the pen with remaining insulin, 7.0% saved it for future use and 1.8% left the dose incomplete.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Satisfaction and preference for IL200 was high in this sample of patients using IL200 for 3-12 months. Reasons were consistent with IL200 features, explaining the better patient experience and potential resource saving transitioning from a disposable MTI-100 pen.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders</journal><pagination>2939-2953</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8519973</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Satisfaction, Preference and Injection Habits of Switching to 200 Units/ml Insulin Lispro Pen from 100 Units/ml: A Patient Survey in Germany.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8519973</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Perez-Nieves M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chen J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Osumili B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Piras De Oliveira C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schloot NC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Thun B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bluher M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Williams P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Spaepen E</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Poon JL</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Satisfaction, Preference and Injection Habits of Switching to 200 Units/ml Insulin Lispro Pen from 100 Units/ml: A Patient Survey in Germany.</name><description>&lt;h4>Introduction&lt;/h4>The study was designed to assess patient satisfaction, preferences and injection habits for patients using insulin lispro 200 units/ml pen (IL200) compared to their previously used disposable 100 units/ml mealtime insulin pen ("MTI-100 pen") in Germany.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>A site-based, cross-sectional study involving a self-reported survey and medical record extraction in patients with diabetes currently using IL200 for between 3 and 12 months and had previously used any disposable MTI-100 pen.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Of 114 patients included, 83.3% were satisfied with IL200 and 3.5% were dissatisfied; 70.2% preferred IL200 over their previous MTI-100 pen and 4.4% preferred their previous MTI-100 pen. The main reasons for IL200 preference were the amount of insulin the pen carries, longer use before discarding, number of non-empty pens discarded, injection volume and frequency replacing pens. Patients discarded (median) 4 IL200 pens per month with 5.3% discarding more than 10 units in their last pen. When insufficient insulin remained to complete a dose, 74.6% injected the remainder and completed with a new pen, 19.3% discarded the pen with remaining insulin, 7.0% saved it for future use and 1.8% left the dose incomplete.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Satisfaction and preference for IL200 was high in this sample of patients using IL200 for 3-12 months. Reasons were consistent with IL200 features, explaining the better patient experience and potential resource saving transitioning from a disposable MTI-100 pen.</description><dates><release>2021-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2021 Nov</publication><modification>2025-04-19T06:08:17.421Z</modification><creation>2025-04-19T06:08:17.421Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8519973</accession><cross_references><pubmed>34542865</pubmed><doi>10.1007/s13300-021-01150-7</doi></cross_references></HashMap>