Background Numerous biologic drugs, including etanercept and adalimumab, are administered subcutaneously. This study reviewed the evidence on the usability and preference of self-injection devices of SB4 and SB5 compared with the reference product injectors.Methods A systematic search was conducted in PubMed using the search string "(Imraldi OR Hadlima OR SB5 OR Benepali OR Brenzys OR SB4) AND (preference) AND (device)" covering the period from 28 January 2016 (first introduction of SB4) to 31 May 2022. Only articles and abstracts on usability or preference-rating of SB4 and SB5 autoinjectors ( AI) written in English were selected. Additional papers identified via manual search supplemented the retrieved papers.Results A total of nine articles and one conference poster were selected ( seven surveys, one observational study, and two phase II studies). Overall, participants of the studies included nurses and rheumatologists, as well as patients who were from three medical specialties where these medicines are most commonly used (rheumatology, gastroenterology, and dermatology). The majority of patients and healthcare professionals rated ease of use and ease of grip as the most important device attributes. SB4/Pen and SB5/Pen were mostly preferred over their prefilled syringes (PFS), Enbrel/Pen, and Humira/ Pen.Conclusion The analyzed data on usability and device preference indicate that SB4/Pen and SB5/Pen were preferred over the other reference product autoinjectors, thanks to their button-free design, auditory and visual injection feedback, and overall ease of use. Therefore, they were preferred over the other reference product autoinjectors. Because user-friendly devices can improve treatment adherence, pharmaceutical companies should consider patient convenience when developing medical devices.

Healthcare Professional (HCP) and Patient Usability Evaluation and Preferences of Two Auto-injector Devices for Self-Injection of Biosimilars, SB4 and SB5: A Literature Review

Armuzzi, Alessandro;
2023-01-01

Abstract

Background Numerous biologic drugs, including etanercept and adalimumab, are administered subcutaneously. This study reviewed the evidence on the usability and preference of self-injection devices of SB4 and SB5 compared with the reference product injectors.Methods A systematic search was conducted in PubMed using the search string "(Imraldi OR Hadlima OR SB5 OR Benepali OR Brenzys OR SB4) AND (preference) AND (device)" covering the period from 28 January 2016 (first introduction of SB4) to 31 May 2022. Only articles and abstracts on usability or preference-rating of SB4 and SB5 autoinjectors ( AI) written in English were selected. Additional papers identified via manual search supplemented the retrieved papers.Results A total of nine articles and one conference poster were selected ( seven surveys, one observational study, and two phase II studies). Overall, participants of the studies included nurses and rheumatologists, as well as patients who were from three medical specialties where these medicines are most commonly used (rheumatology, gastroenterology, and dermatology). The majority of patients and healthcare professionals rated ease of use and ease of grip as the most important device attributes. SB4/Pen and SB5/Pen were mostly preferred over their prefilled syringes (PFS), Enbrel/Pen, and Humira/ Pen.Conclusion The analyzed data on usability and device preference indicate that SB4/Pen and SB5/Pen were preferred over the other reference product autoinjectors, thanks to their button-free design, auditory and visual injection feedback, and overall ease of use. Therefore, they were preferred over the other reference product autoinjectors. Because user-friendly devices can improve treatment adherence, pharmaceutical companies should consider patient convenience when developing medical devices.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11699/83963
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact