Insulin Injection Technique is Associated with Glycemic Variability in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Advance Insulin Injection Technique and Education With FITTER Forward Expert Recommendations

Injectable insulin therapy is a valuable therapeutic option for millions of people with diabetes worldwide. However, many people with diabetes undergoing insulin therapy experience suboptimal outcomes and/or have complications because of inadequate injection technique and training. Practical, current, evidence-based recommendations are mandatory for primary care practitioners and diabetes specialists alike to address unmet needs in insulin injection technique, education, and consequent outcomes. The most recent global insulin injection technique best practices were published in 2016 by the Forum for Injection Technique and Therapy Expert Recommendations (FITTER). While injection technique efforts in different regions have reflected some developments since 2016, a global effort was warranted to comprehensively capture new evidence and modern expert perspectives. In this article, we share the output of the "FITTER Forward" initiative, authored by 16 diabetes specialists from 13 countries who met virtually in 2023-2024. FITTER Forward provides an updated rationale for the importance of proper injection technique training and its impact on diabetes management. The FITTER Forward recommendations are organized for use in clinical practice and include 4 sections describing (1) the foundational science informing injection device design, experiences, and outcomes, (2) proper injection technique procedures for insulin pens and syringes from insulin storage to needle disposal, (3) lipodystrophy risk reduction, with a focus on lipohypertrophy, and (4) structured injection technique training programs for people with diabetes. Overall, FITTER Forward aims to better equip health care professionals to advance diabetes care by empowering people with diabetes and their caregivers to correctly and safely deliver insulin.

Insulin Injection Technique and Related Complications in Patients With Diabetes in a Northwest City of China

OBJECTIVES

Appropriate insulin injection technique can help to enhance positive clinical outcomes in insulin-treated patients. This cross-sectional survey was undertaken to assess the present state of injection technique practices of patients administering insulin and the incidence of local complications associated with insulin injection.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted at 11 tertiary hospitals in Xi'an City. A total of 1370 patients with diabetes were enroled in the survey. Each patient was asked questions on the Injection Technique questionnaire, demonstrated insulin injection on an injection training pad and had their injection sites inspected by a nurse.

RESULTS

About 98% of participants were type 2 diabetic patients. The 5 mm length needles were used by 640 (46.71%) patients. Around 1286 participants reused pen needles. Only one-third of patients rotate the injection sites. Around 901 patients had ecchymosis at injection sites, 43 participants suffered rash and or pruritus and 661 patients had lipohypertrophy. About 2.99% of patients reported having infection at the injection sites. Most patients (72.55%) occasionally felt pain when injecting insulin. The results of the multivariable logistict analysis showed that gender (male), needle length, priming the pen before injections and correct site rotation were negatively associated with the incidence of injection site ecchymosis. Lower incidence of lipohypertrophy was associated with needle length 4 mm, needle length 6 mm, single use of pen needles, priming the pen before injections and correct site rotation. Higher incidence of injection site infection was related to not disinfecting injection sites before each injection.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some improvements detected in some aspects of patients' insulin injection practice in recent years, a large gap still exists between insulin injection guidelines and patients' actual injection behaviour. Injection-related complications at injection sites are still considerably common among our study population. Patients' education regarding insulin injection technique should be conducted repeatedly and regularly to make sure patients' compliance to injection guidelines.

Are People With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Appropriately Following Insulin Injection Technique Practices: A Review of Literature

People with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) need to take multiple doses of insulin injections daily throughout their lives. However, a notable portion of people with diabetes mellitus (DM) show suboptimal insulin injection technique practices. They are supposed to follow the recommended insulin injection technique guidelines. Our explorative literature search, including studies from the past 30 years, is expected to identify the deficiencies of self-injection insulin techniques and the associated complications in people with T1DM, where we have summarised the overall incidence of complications that have occurred due to nonadherence of the prescribed guidelines, along with their associated risk factors. We have attempted to include multiple systematic reviews, meta-analyses, literature reviews, case reports, and original articles from the search engines and databases like PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and BioMed Central, and studies with only human participants were included in this search. The knowledge sharing from this research may be utilised for enhancing the structured education diabetes programme and implementing the population-based corrective measures, including the thrust areas in future multi-centre longitudinal research studies and recommendations, which can prevent unnecessary complications and enhance their quality of life. Correct insulin administration technique, abstaining from administration of injection at the areas with lipohypertrophy, rotation of injection sites, and ultrasound scanning can be used as a complimentary method to detect the lipohypertrophy at an early stage. Liposuction is beneficial in reducing the extensive lipohypertrophic tissues but helps achieve only cosmetically satisfactory outcome; thus, empowering people to follow insulin injection technique guidelines is one of the best strategies to reduce the high prevalence of lipohypertrophy. To conclude, education among the people with DM, especially T1DM who have to take insulin regularly, needs to be carried out consistently in the clinical settings, to prevent the severe complications caused due to inappropriate insulin injection techniques.

Addressing Insulin Injection Technique: A Follow-up Study of Canadian Patients with Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Proper insulin injection technique is important for optimal glycaemic control, yet patients with diabetes often inject insulin incorrectly. Previous studies identified common errors in insulin injection in Canada, and this article seeks to evaluate the current insulin injection technique practices among patients and explore the effectiveness of feedback and education in improving their technique.

METHODS

The study recruited 147 patients and 16 physicians across Canada to gather insights into current insulin injection practices and education gaps. Eligible patients were people living with diabetes who inject insulin using an insulin pen and pen needles. Eligible physicians, who were unsupported by diabetes educators, completed a practice assessment survey and selected 10 eligible patients to complete a baseline assessment survey. During the patient visit, if an error in the patient's technique was identified, a pop-up knowledge transfer (KT) prompt would appear, providing feedback and information on best practices at the point of care. Follow-up surveys were completed 1-3 months later.

RESULTS

Physicians reported facing barriers to providing education and feedback, including lack of time and personnel, and lack of effective educational material. Patients demonstrated modest improvements in some injection technique domains at their follow-up visit, including injection force factors, time the needle was held in the skin, pen needle reuse, injection area size, and injection angle. The most common initial mistakes by patients were selecting an area smaller than recommended and not paying attention to the injection force. At the second visit, patients reduced an average of one error in their injection technique.

CONCLUSION

Results showed that basic feedback by their physician during one visit could exert moderate improvements on patients' injection technique. Proper injection technique is critical for diabetes management, and incorporating targeted ongoing education and support can significantly enhance physician practices, ultimately reducing risks and improving outcomes.

Effect of Insulin Injection Techniques on Glycemic Control Among Patients with Diabetes

Objective

Previous studies have shown that healthcare professionals rarely instruct patients about proper insulin injection techniques. This study aimed to assess the practices of insulin injection techniques among patients with diabetes treated and assess the effect of these practices on glycemic control.

Patients and Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted between November 2020 and February 2021. A random systematic sampling technique was used to recruit study subjects at specialist outpatient clinics. Subjects with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus who had been using insulin injections for at least a year were included in this study.

Results

A total of 298 subjects with type 1 diabetes and 553 with type 2 diabetes participated in this study. The mean age of patients with type 1 diabetes was 20.1 ± 10.4 years. The mean age of patients with type 2 diabetes was 58.6 ± 9.5 years. The median type 1 diabetes duration was 6.0 years, and median type 2 diabetes duration was 15.0 years. About 66.8% of patients with type 1 diabetes and 69.4% of patients with type 2 diabetes were rotating insulin injection sites. Almost 36.6% of patients with type 1 diabetes and 50.5% of patients with type 2 diabetes reported using the same insulin needle more than three times. The prevalence of lipohypertrophy was 57.0% among patients with type 1 diabetes and 55.5% among patients with type 2 diabetes. The absence of lipohypertrophy, rotation of insulin injection site, and total daily insulin dose ≤50 units were all independently significantly associated with better glycemic control.

Conclusion

Insulin injection techniques were suboptimal among significant proportion of patients with diabetes in Jordan. Improper insulin injection technique, especially the rotation of injection sites and lipohypertrophy formation, was associated with uncontrolled blood glucose levels. Educational interventions that focus on insulin injection techniques among Jordanian patients with diabetes are strongly recommended.

Investigation of Association Between Insulin Injection Technique and Blood Glucose Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

The appropriate insulin injection skill is essential for optimal blood sugar control in patients with diabetes. However, the art of insulin injection is still not well understood in numerous medical centers.

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to determine the association between appropriate insulin injection and blood glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes in Yazd, Iran.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted on 301 patients with type 2 diabetes who referred to Diabetes Research Center in Yazd within August 2020 to February 2021. Based on simple random sampling, the subjects with inclusion criteria, such as age >18 years, using an insulin pen for at least 3 months, and self-injection, were selected. The insulin injection technique was evaluated by a 13-item researcher-made questionnaire. The total score of this questionnaire was 26, and its validity and reliability were confirmed. The data were analyzed using SPSS software (version 20).

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 59.83 ± 10.26 years, and 60.1% had primary school or less education. Most participants (87%) used a needle more than five times, and almost half of them (53.5%) did not rotate the injection sites properly. The patients who reported pain during injection had statically lower injection scores than others (17.90 vs. 19.38, P = 0.001). There was a significant negative correlation between insulin injection score with fasting blood sugar (β = -0.232, P < 0.001), two-hour postprandial glucose (β = -0.164, P = 0.005), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level (β = -0.263, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

None of the patients in this study fully followed the principles of a proper injection, which can lead to pain during injection, lipohypertrophy, hyperglycemia, and increased HbA1c levels.

Association between sexuality and quality of life in older adults

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the association between the experiences of sexuality and quality of life in older adults.

METHOD

Cross-sectional study developed with a total of 300 older adults living in northeastern Brazil. Data collection was carried out entirely online between August and October 2020. Participants completed the online questionnaire containing three instruments for assessing bio sociodemographic data, sexuality and quality of life. Data analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, Spearman correlation and multivariate linear regression tests, adopting a 95% confidence interval (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Older adults experience better affective relationships and have better quality of life in sensory abilities and intimacy. In the regression analysis, only affective relationships (β = 0.510; [95% CI: 0.340-0.682]; p < 0.001) and physical and social adversities (β = -0.180; [95% CI:-1.443-0.434]; p < 0.001) remained associated with the general quality of life of older adults.

CONCLUSION

Health professionals must invest in training, development of individual and group educational interventions, in addition to promoting the strengthening of bonds between older adults so that they feel free and comfort in expressing their intimate needs.

A practical approach to the clinical challenges in initiation of basal insulin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes

Initiating insulin therapy with a basal insulin analogue has become a standard of care in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Despite increasing choices in pharmacological approaches, intensified glucose monitoring and improvements in quality of care, many patients do not achieve the desired level of glycaemic control. Although insulin therapy, when optimized, can help patients reach their glycaemic goals, there are barriers to treatment initiation on both the side of the patient and provider. Providers experience barriers based on their perceptions of patients' capabilities and concerns. They may lack the confidence to solve the practical problems of insulin therapy and avoid decisions they perceive as risky for their patients. In this study, we review recommendations for basal insulin initiation, focussing on glycaemic targets, titration, monitoring, and combination therapy with non-insulin anti-hyperglycaemic medications. We provide practical advice on how to address some of the key problems encountered in everyday clinical practice and give recommendations where there are gaps in knowledge or guidelines. We also discuss common challenges faced by people with T2DM, such as weight gain and hypoglycaemia, and how providers can address and overcome them.

Fasting Glucose of 6.1 mmol/L as a Possible Optimal Target for Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Insulin Glargine: A Randomized Clinical Trial

To observe whether different insulin glargine titration algorithms based on fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels lead to different glycaemic variations (GVs) in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients, a prospective, randomized, single-centre, comparative, three-arm parallel-group, open-label, treat-to-target, 24-week study was performed. A total of 71 uncontrolled T2D patients were recruited and randomized 1 : 3 : 3 into Groups 1, 2, and 3 (insulin titration goals of FBG ≤ 5.6, ≤6.1, and ≤7.0) for this study. The initiated insulin glargine dose was recommended at 0.2 U/kg/day and was then titrated following the FBG target. Patients were subjected to two 3-day continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) at baseline and the endpoint, wherein the CGM data were analysed, and the study's primary endpoint was the difference in 24 hrs mean amplitude of glycaemic excursion (MAGE) among the three groups. We observed that patients in the three groups had similar MAGE levels at the endpoint; however, Group 2 achieved a significant decrease in the MAGE level from baseline to the endpoint as compared to Groups 1 and 3 (all p < 0.05). We also observed that these patients had significant glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) value improvements as compared to the other two groups (all p < 0.05). Therefore, choosing an FBG level of 6.1 mmol/L as an insulin titration target provided significant GVs and HbA1c value improvements in T2D patients. Moreover, our data indicated that an FBG of 6.1 mmol/L could possibly be an insulin glargine titration target in T2D patients.

Will oral semaglutide be a game-changer in the management of type 2 diabetes in primary care?

GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are recommended for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), particularly those at high cardiovascular risk. Oral semaglutide is the first oral GLP-1RA. In clinical trials, oral semaglutide 14 mg reduced mean HbA_1c by approximately 1.1-1.5% and reduced body weight by up to 5 kg. These changes were significantly greater compared with empagliflozin, sitagliptin and liraglutide (p < 0.05 for estimated treatment differences at 52 weeks in patients on treatment without rescue medication use). The most common side effects were gastrointestinal, mainly mild-to-moderate and transient nausea. Oral semaglutide may change the paradigm of T2D treatment in primary care.

Insulin Injection Practices in a Population of Canadians with Diabetes: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Proper insulin injection technique has demonstrated positive clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes. A Canadian-based practice reflective was undertaken to evaluate the current state of understanding of injection technique practices by patients administering insulin, and the importance physicians place on proper injection technique.

METHODS

Twenty-four sites across Canada completed a practice profile survey and enrolled adult non-pregnant patients with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes injecting insulin using an insulin pen. Seven areas of proper injection technique to be evaluated were identified by the study steering committee: size of injection site, use of a skin lift, needle reuse, length of the needle, duration of the needle in the skin, injection into lipohypertrophic tissue, and applied injection force. During a scheduled visit, each patient filled out the Injection Technique Survey and the physician documented the answers via an electronic database.

RESULTS

Almost all physicians surveyed agreed (96%) that proper insulin injection technique is important or very important and 80% indicated they were either completely confident or fairly confident in discussing overall insulin injection technique. All patients surveyed were making at least one insulin injection technique error within the following categories: applied injection force (76%), area size of injection site (64%), duration of pen needle in skin (61%), pen needle reuse (39%), performs a skin lift with a 4 or 5 mm needle (38%), uses a longer pen needle than required (34%), and injection of insulin into lipohypertrophic tissue (37%).

CONCLUSION

Patients commonly make insulin injection errors. Patient and physician education on optimal insulin injection technique continues to be an unmet medical need for the treatment of patients with diabetes. Prospective trials examining the impact of new technology, diabetes educational teams, and e-learning as educational interventions are potential avenues to explore in future studies to support improved insulin injection technique.

A View Beyond HbA1c: Role of Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) is used as an index of average blood glucose measurement over a period of months and is a mainstay of blood glucose monitoring. This metric is easy to measure and relatively inexpensive to obtain, and it predicts diabetes-related microvascular complications. However, HbA1c provides only an approximate measure of glucose control; it does not address short-term glycemic variability (GV) or hypoglycemic events. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a tool which helps clinicians and people with diabetes to overcome the limitations of HbA1c in diabetes management. Time spent in the glycemic target range and time spent in hypoglycemia are the main CGM metrics that provide a more personalized approach to diabetes management. Moreover, the glucose management indicator (GMI), which calculates an approximate HbA1c level based on the average CGM-driven glucose level, facilitates individual decision-making when the laboratory-measured HbA1c and estimated HbA1c are discordant. GV, on the other hand, is a measure of swings in blood glucose levels over hours or days and may contribute to diabetes-related complications. In addition, addressing GV is a major challenge during the optimization of glycemia. The degree of GV is associated with the frequency, duration, and severity of the hypoglycemic events. Many factors affect GV in a patient, including lifestyle, diet, the presence of comorbidities, and diabetes therapy. Recent evidence supports the use of some glucose-lowering agents to improve GV, such as the new ultra-long acting insulin analogs, as these agents have a smoother pharmacodynamic profile and improve glycemic control with fewer fluctuations and fewer nocturnal hypoglycemic events. These newer glucose-lowering agents (such as incretin hormones or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors) can also reduce the degree of GV. However, randomized trials are needed to evaluate the effect of GV on important diabetes outcomes. In this review, we discuss the role of HbA1c as a measure of glycemic control and its limitations. We also explore additional glycemic metrics, with a focus on time (duration) in glucose target range, time (duration) in hypoglycemia, GV, GMI, and their correlation with clinical outcomes.