| Title |
The Clinical and Economic Impact of the V-Go® Disposable Insulin Delivery Device for Insulin Delivery in Patients with Poorly Controlled Diabetes at High Risk
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drugs - Real World Outcomes, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40801-016-0075-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rosemarie Lajara, Carla Nikkel, Scott Abbott |
| Abstract |
Diabetes is a chronic condition and when poorly controlled can lead to complications and death. Patients with glycated hemoglobin (A1C) measures >9 % are at significant risk for diabetes-related complications impacting the patient's quality of life and imposing higher costs on the healthcare system. A1C reductions of 1 % or greater in this population have demonstrated substantial health and economic benefits. Reducing the percent of patients at risk is an essential component of quality-care measures established for patients with diabetes. To evaluate if switching patients prescribed subcutaneous insulin injections to V-Go for insulin delivery would impact clinical and economic parameters in patients with poorly controlled diabetes (A1C > 9 %). The study was a retrospective analysis using data extracted from the electronic medical records database of a multicenter diabetes system. Outcome measures included mean change in A1C from baseline, the percent of patients achieving a reduction in A1C ≥1 % while on V-Go therapy, and the impact to quality measures. In addition, economic analyses were conducted to assess the pharmacy budget impact and projected implication to total healthcare cost. Ninety-seven patients were evaluated after a mean duration of 13.6 ± 6.9 weeks of insulin delivery with V-Go. Switching to V-Go resulted in an overall mean change (95 % CI) in A1C of -2.0 % (-1.7 to -2.3; p < 0.001) from a baseline of 10.5 %. Seventy-three percent of patients achieved an A1C reduction ≥1 %. Cost analysis supported a direct pharmacy savings of $119.30 (18.80-219.60, p = 0.020) per patient per month compared with baseline. Switching to V-Go for insulin delivery resulted in significant glycemic improvement and proved cost effective. This real-world assessment could be applied more broadly at the health system and plan level. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 42% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 25% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 17% |
| Psychology | 2 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2016.
All research outputs
#597,967
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from Drugs - Real World Outcomes
#6
of 182 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,961
of 339,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs - Real World Outcomes
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 182 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,291 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them