ACCEPTABILITY OF BRIEF SELF-ADMINISTERED INJECTION TECHNIQUE ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Session Name
HUMAN FACTOR IN THE USE OF DIABETES TECHNOLOGY
Session Type
E-POSTER VIEWING (EXHIBITION HOURS)
Date
20.02.2020, Thursday
Session Time
09:30 - 15:30
Channel
E-Poster Area
Lecture Time
09:33 - 09:34
Presenter
  • Katharine Barnard-Kelly, United Kingdom
Authors
  • Katharine Barnard-Kelly, United Kingdom
  • Lee Calladine, United Kingdom
  • Didier Morel, France
  • Amy Winchcombe, United Kingdom
  • Leah Baccari, United States of America
  • Edward Mahoney, United States of America
  • Stanislav Glezer, United States of America

Abstract

Background and Aims

To assess the acceptability, relevance, usability and usefulness of a novel brief self-administered injection technique assessment tool.

Methods

The tool was developed using an iterative process in conjunction with people with diabetes and healthcare professionals. Focus groups and one-to-one interviews were held with three separate groups consisting of adults with type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes or healthcare professionals to elicit views and refine the tool ready for broader distribution to the target audience. Questions addressed ease of understanding, relevance, included questions and potential missing questions, feelings about diabetes and any discomfort or judgement felt when completing the tool.

Results

Five healthcare professionals and sixteen people with diabetes participated. Questions were reported to be clinically relevant by healthcare professionals and simple to complete. People with diabetes reported the tool to be ‘about the right length’, with the questions relevant and easy to read and follow. Adding ‘sometimes’ to response options was felt beneficial to more accurately reflect real-life diabetes management, along with clarification of medication type (i.e., different types of insulin and non-insulin medications). Overall, all groups felt this would be a useful tool to help people using injectable therapies refresh their technique for optimal dosing.

Conclusions

The tool was well-received by participants who made several suggestions for wording changes and clarification of individual questions. The resulting eleven item tool will be distributed to a wider target audience for reliability and psychometric analyses prior to final potential amendments and broader use.

Hide