Dataset Information

Nurse and Patient Perceptions and Preferences for Subcutaneous Autoinjectors for Inflammatory Joint or Bowel Disease: Findings from a European Survey.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Imraldi™ is a biosimilar of the anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) monoclonal antibody adalimumab and was recently approved in Europe for the treatment of various inflammatory conditions. Imraldi is administered via an autoinjector device that features distinct design attributes compared with other biologic TNF inhibitor autoinjectors, such as the Humira (adalimumab) Pen® and Enbrel® (etanercept) MyClic® Pen were developed by the relevant pharmaceutical companies. The aim of this study was to evaluate patients' and nurses' preferences for the Imraldi versus Humira or Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors in the UK and Germany.

Methods

Patients with inflammatory joint or bowel disease and nurses with experience in educating patients with these conditions on self-injection participated in two survey studies, the first comparing the Imraldi and Humira autoinjectors and the second comparing the Imraldi and Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors.

Results

Overall, 101 nurses (UK, n = 50; Germany, n = 51) and 151 patients (UK, n = 90; Germany, n = 61) participated in both studies. In the first study, 85% of nurses and 78% of patients preferred the Imraldi autoinjector over the Humira autoinjector (P < 0.001); in the second study, 86% of nurses and 79% of patients preferred the Imraldi autoinjector over the Enbrel MyClic autoinjector (P < 0.001). Top reasons for preferring the Imraldi autoinjector included ease of use, ease of grip, and its button-free initiation mechanism. Most nurses indicated they would recommend the Imraldi autoinjector over the Humira and Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors, and most patients indicated they would choose the Imraldi autoinjector over the Humira and Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors to continue treatment.

Conclusion

Nurses and patients in the UK and Germany preferred the Imraldi autoinjector over both the Humira and Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors, which may be a consideration, along with other factors, for treatment decisions in the management of patients with inflammatory joint or bowel disease.

Funding

Biogen International GmbH.

SUBMITTER: Fenwick S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6514039 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionBenepali® was the first etanercept (Enbrel®) biosimilar to be approved in the European Union. Both Benepali and Enbrel are available as autoinjector devices. In a recent survey, nurses from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom (UK) reported that their patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) would prefer the Benepali autoinjector compared to the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. To determine whether patients' perceptions were similar to those of the nurses, this survey evaluated patients' perceptions and preferences of the Benepali autoinjector versus the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector in the same five European countries.MethodsPatients with RA using the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector participated in a 25-min, face-to-face questionnaire-interview. Patients were also shown an instructional video and device-handling leaflet, received a live demonstration on the Benepali autoinjector, and had access to both Benepali and Enbrel MYCLIC training autoinjectors. Patients rated the importance of ten autoinjector attributes on a seven-point scale (1 = not important at all; 7 = extremely important) and provided their autoinjector preferences based on specific attributes. Patients also gave their opinion on which autoinjector they would prefer to use for self-injection.ResultsOverall, 220 patients participated in the survey (France, n = 30; Germany, n = 65; Italy, n = 67; Spain, n = 12; UK, n = 46). 'Easy to operate the self-injection' was ranked as the most important attribute (mean score of 6.8), followed by 'easy to grip' (6.5), and 'intuitive/self-explaining usage' (6.3). Patients preferred the Benepali autoinjector, with the attribute of 'easier to operate' being a strong differentiator compared to the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. Most patients (74%) reported that they would prefer to use the Benepali autoinjector over the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. 'Easy to operate the self-injection' and 'button-free autoinjector' were key drivers when selecting an autoinjector.ConclusionsPatients in Europe reported a preference for the Benepali autoinjector compared to the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. This finding is consistent with results from a recently reported nurse survey.FundingBiogen.

Project description:IntroductionEnbrel® (etanercept: manufactured by Immunex Corporation, Newbury Park, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320, USA) was the first biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Europe. More recently, an etanercept biosimilar (Benepali®: manufactured by Biogen Inc, Cambridge, MA 02124, USA) was approved in the European Union. The perceptions and preferences of the Benepali autoinjector versus Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector were evaluated by nurses from Europe.MethodsThe survey involved a 25-min face-to-face questionnaire-interview with nurses from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK, experienced in training patients on using the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. Nurses viewed an instructional video and device-handling leaflet, received a live demonstration on the Benepali autoinjector and had access to both Benepali and Enbrel MYCLIC training autoinjectors. Nurses rated the importance of ten autoinjector attributes on a scale of 1-7 (1 = not important at all; 7 = extremely important) and provided their autoinjector preferences based on specific attributes. Nurses also gave their opinion on which autoinjector their patients with RA would prefer.ResultsA total of 149 nurses participated in this survey (France, n = 30; Germany, n = 40; Italy, n = 30; Spain, n = 19; UK, n = 30). 'Easy to operate the self-injection' was ranked as the most important attribute (mean score of 6.8), followed by 'easy to grip' (6.6) and 'intuitive/self-explaining usage' (6.6). Nurses preferred the Benepali autoinjector, with attributes of 'easier to operate' and 'more intuitive to use' being strong differentiators compared with the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. Most nurses (86%) reported that their patients would prefer the Benepali autoinjector over the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. 'Easy to operate the self-injection' and 'button-free autoinjector' were key drivers when selecting an autoinjector.ConclusionBased on these survey results, nurses in Europe reported a preference for the Benepali autoinjector compared with the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector for the majority of attributes assessed. In particular, attributes of 'easy to operate' and 'more intuitive/self-explaining to use' were highly rated for the Benepali autoinjector, which may allow easy handling of the autoinjector.FundingBiogen International GmBH.

Project description:BackgroundNursing students enter nursing programs with idealistic perceptions of what it is to be a nurse. Upon graduation, many find these perceptions mismatched with the actual nurse's role. This can lead to discontentment in their chosen career. These issues highlight the importance of nursing students developing an understanding of the nurse's role during their undergraduate nursing education. One way to accomplish this is to assess perceptions and address them accordingly during the nursing program. Survey tools assessing perceptions of nursing exist but lack contemporary and multicultural foci.AimTo develop a feasible, valid, and reliable survey tool to identify nursing students' perceptions of being a nurse.Design/methodsIn Phase 1, a literature review and Nominal Group Technique meetings were used to generate primary survey items. Phase 2 included a pre-pilot and online pilot testing of the Perceptions of being a Registered Nurse (PRN) survey tool with 797 nursing students across all year levels at three Australian Universities.ResultsThe 34-item PRN survey tool uses a five-point Likert scale to measure nursing students' perceptions of nursing, including factors influencing a nurse's well-being, attributes and qualities of nurses, the role of the nurse, and nursing professionalism. The Item-Content validity index was high (> 0.78), and the inter-item correlation validity was identified by Pearson's product-moment coefficient of r = .712. Internal reliability was confirmed with a Cronbach's alpha = 0.83. Based upon the participation completion rate, the survey tool was deemed applicable and feasible. The majority of respondents believed that nurses have altruistic attributes; however, perceptions of nursing varied significantly when rating factors influencing the physical, emotional, and social well-being of a nurse. In later stages of training, respondents were more likely to agree that nursing is physically and emotionally demanding and that nurses experience social isolation due to shift work, finding it difficult to achieve a work-life balance.ConclusionsThe PRN survey tool was found to be valid, reliable, and feasible. Future use and outcomes from PRN assessments may lead to changes to nursing curricula that enhance nursing students' perceptions of nursing.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Addressing Citizen's perspectives on homelessness is crucial for the design of effective and durable policy responses, and available research in Europe is not yet substantive. We aim to explore citizens' opinions about homelessness and to explain the differences in attitudes within the general population of eight European countries: France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden. METHODS:A nationally representative telephone survey of European citizens was conducted in 2017. Three domains were investigated: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices about homelessness. Based on a multiple correspondence analysis (MCA), a generalized linear model for clustered and weighted samples was used to probe the associations between groups with opposing attitudes. RESULTS:Response rates ranged from 30.4% to 33.5% (N = 5,295). Most respondents (57%) had poor knowledge about homelessness. Respondents who thought the government spent too much on homelessness, people who are homeless should be responsible for housing, people remain homeless by choice, or homelessness keeps capabilities/empowerment intact (regarding meals, family contact, and access to work) clustered together (negative attitudes, 30%). Respondents who were willing to pay taxes, welcomed a shelter, or acknowledged people who are homeless may lack some capabilities (i.e. agreed on discrimination in hiring) made another cluster (positive attitudes, 58%). Respondents living in semi-urban or urban areas (ORs 1.33 and 1.34) and those engaged in practices to support people who are homeless (ORs > 1.4; p<0.005) were more likely to report positive attitudes, whereas those from France and Poland (p<0.001) were less likely to report positive attitudes. CONCLUSION:The majority of European citizens hold positive attitudes towards people who are homeless, however there remain significant differences between and within countries. Although it is clear that there is strong support for increased government action and more effective solutions for Europe's growing homelessness crisis, there also remain public opinion barriers rooted in enduring negative perceptions.

Project description:UnlabelledBackgroundHealth Examination Surveys (HESs) can provide essential information on the health and health determinants of a population, which is not available from other data sources. Nevertheless, only some European countries have systems of national HESs. A study conducted in 2006-2008 concluded that it is feasible to organize national HESs using standardized measurement procedures in nearly all EU countries. The feasibility study also outlined a structure for a European Health Examination Survey (EHES), which is a collaboration to organize standardized HESs in countries across Europe.To facilitate setting up national surveys and to gain experience in applying the EHES methods in different cultures, EHES Joint Action (2010-2011) planned and piloted standardized HESs in the working age population in 12 countries. This included countries with earlier national HESs and countries which were planning their first national HES. The core measurements included in all surveys were weight, height, waist circumference and blood pressure, and blood samples were taken to measure lipid profiles and glucose or glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). These are modifiable determinants of major chronic diseases not identified in health interview surveys. There was a questionnaire to complement the data on the examination measurements.MethodsEvaluation of the pilot surveys was based on review of national manuals and evaluation reports of survey organizers; observations and discussions of survey procedures during site visits and training seminars; and other communication with the survey organizers.ResultsDespite unavoidable differences in the ways HESs are organized in the various countries, high quality and comparability of the data seems achievable. The biggest challenge in each country was obtaining high participation rate. Most of the pilot countries are now ready to start their full-size national HES, and six of them have already started.ConclusionsThe EHES Pilot Project has set up the structure for obtaining comparable high quality health indicators on health and important modifiable risk factors of major non-communicable diseases from the European countries. The European Union is now in a key position to make this structure sustainable. The EHES core survey can be expanded to cover other measurements.

Project description:BackgroundDigital health technologies hold promise to enhance patient-related outcomes, to support health care staff by reducing their workload, and to improve the coordination of care. As key users of digital health technologies, health care workers are crucial to enable a meaningful digital transformation of health care. Digital health literacy and digital skills should become prerequisite competencies for health professionals to facilitate the implementation and leverage the potential of digital technologies to improve health.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess European medical students' perceived knowledge and opinions toward digital health, the status of digital health implementation in medical education, and the students' most pressing needs.MethodsThe explanatory design of our mixed methods study was based on an online, anonymous, self-administered survey targeted toward European medical students. A linear regression analysis was used to identify the influence of the year of medical studies on the responses. Additional analysis was performed by grouping the responses by the self-evaluated frequency of eHealth technology use. Written responses to four qualitative questions in the survey were analyzed using an inductive approach.ResultsThe survey received a total of 451 responses from 39 European countries, and there were respondents for every year of medical studies. The majority of respondents saw advantages in the use of digital health. While 40.6% (183/451) felt prepared to work in a digitized health care system, more than half (240/451, 53.2%) evaluated their eHealth skills as poor or very poor. Medical students considered lack of education to be the reason for this, with 84.9% (383/451) agreeing or strongly agreeing that more digital health education should be implemented in the medical curriculum. Students demanded introductory and specific eHealth courses covering data management, ethical aspects, legal frameworks, research and entrepreneurial opportunities, role in public health and health systems, communication skills, and practical training. The emphasis lay on tailoring learning to future job requirements and interprofessional education.ConclusionsThis study shows a lack of digital health-related formats in medical education and a perceived lack of digital health literacy among European medical students. Our findings indicate a gap between the willingness of medical students to take an active role by becoming key players in the digital transformation of health care and the education that they receive through their faculties.