PMID- 33296064
OWN - NLM
STAT- PubMed-not-MEDLINE
LR  - 20201218
IS  - 2509-8020 (Electronic)
IS  - 2509-8020 (Linking)
VI  - 4
IP  - 1
DP  - 2020 Dec 9
TI  - Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire 
      (DID-PQ).
PG  - 104
LID - 10.1186/s41687-020-00266-x [doi]
LID - 104
AB  - INTRODUCTION: The Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) was 
      designed to assess patient preference between two non-insulin injection devices. 
      In a recent crossover study, people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) completed the 
      DID-PQ after performing mock injections with two non-insulin injection devices. 
      The purpose of the current analysis was to use these data to assess construct 
      validity of the DID-PQ and demonstrate one way to test whether there is a 
      significant preference for one injection device over another. METHODS: Data were 
      from an open-label, multicenter, randomized, crossover study assessing preference 
      between the dulaglutide and semaglutide injection pens. In addition to the 
      10-item DID-PQ, people with T2D completed a global item assessing overall 
      preference. DID-PQ responses were compared to the global preference item (percent 
      agreement, Gwet's AC1, prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted Kappa [PABAK]). For 
      each item of the DID-PQ, a two-sided binomial test assessed whether the 
      difference in preference was statistically significant. RESULTS: The sample 
      included 310 participants (48.4% female; mean age = 60.0). The DID-PQ had minimal 
      missing data. There was strong concordance (percent agreement > 78%) between the 
      global preference item and all DID-PQ items except item 6, which assesses 
      preference related to needle size (59.7%). The Gwet AC1 and PABAK statistics also 
      indicated strong agreement between the global preference item and all DID-PQ 
      items except item 6. There was a statistically significant difference 
      (p < 0.0001) in preference on every DID-PQ item, with more participants 
      preferring the dulaglutide device. DISCUSSION: Patient preference has been 
      recommended as a "major factor driving the choice of medication" in a consensus 
      report by the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the 
      Study of Diabetes. Current findings suggest that the DID-PQ may be a useful tool 
      for providing insight into preferences of people with T2D using non-insulin 
      injectable medication.
FAU - Boye, Kristina S
AU  - Boye KS
AD  - Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
FAU - Matza, Louis S
AU  - Matza LS
AUID- ORCID: 0000-0001-6374-5948
AD  - Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA. 
      louis.matza@evidera.com.
FAU - Currie, Brooke M
AU  - Currie BM
AD  - Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.
FAU - Coyne, Karin S
AU  - Coyne KS
AD  - Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.
LA  - eng
GR  - EVA-25176/Eli Lilly and Company/
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20201209
PL  - Germany
TA  - J Patient Rep Outcomes
JT  - Journal of patient-reported outcomes
JID - 101722688
PMC - PMC7726085
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - Crossover study
OT  - Dulaglutide
OT  - Injection devices
OT  - PRO
OT  - Patient-reported outcome measures
OT  - Preference
OT  - Semaglutide
OT  - Type 2 diabetes
COIS- Louis Matza, Karin Coyne, and Brooke Currie are employees of Evidera, a company 
      that received funding from Eli Lilly for time spent conducting this research. 
      Kristina Boye is an employee of and owns stock in Eli Lilly and Company.
EDAT- 2020/12/10 06:00
MHDA- 2020/12/10 06:01
PMCR- 2020/12/09
CRDT- 2020/12/09 12:15
PHST- 2020/02/14 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2020/11/03 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2020/12/09 12:15 [entrez]
PHST- 2020/12/10 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2020/12/10 06:01 [medline]
PHST- 2020/12/09 00:00 [pmc-release]
AID - 10.1186/s41687-020-00266-x [pii]
AID - 266 [pii]
AID - 10.1186/s41687-020-00266-x [doi]
PST - epublish
SO  - J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2020 Dec 9;4(1):104. doi: 10.1186/s41687-020-00266-x.