Last reviewed · How we verify

NCT03878745

Comparative User Experiences With BD Nano™ PRO 32G Extra Thin Wall Pen Needle vs the Terumo Nanopass® 34G Pen Needle

Completed NA Results posted Last updated 19 May 2020
What this trial tests

NA trial testing Terumo Nanopass® 34G pen needle in Diabetes in 55 participants. Completed in 14 June 2019.

Timeline
11 February 2019
Primary endpoint
14 June 2019
14 June 2019

Quick facts

Lead sponsorBecton, Dickinson and Company
PhaseNA
StatusCompleted
Study typeINTERVENTIONAL
Allocationnon randomized
Designsingle group
Maskingnone
Primary purposeother
Enrollment55
Start date11 February 2019
Primary completion14 June 2019
Estimated completion14 June 2019
Sites2 locations across United States

Drugs / interventions tested

Conditions studied

Sponsor

Becton, Dickinson and Company — full company profile →

Who can join

Adults 18 to 75, any sex, with Diabetes. Patients with the condition only — healthy volunteers not accepted.

Results — posted to ClinicalTrials.gov

Per-arm endpoint measurements with 95% confidence intervals where reported. Source: trial results section.

BD Nano™ PRO Pen Needle Compared to Terumo Nanopass® (Injection Pain) Primary · Scores were collected immediately after each paired injection

Injection pain as measured by a relative 150mm visual analog scale. Injection pain as measured by a relative visual analog scale. s. User preference is assessed through a single question reported on a 150mm relative VAS scale with the BD Nano™ PRO pen needle Pen labeled at +75 mm and the Comparator pen needle labeled at -75mm. On this scale, zero represents no preference to either pen needle. Relative VAS scores range from -75mm to 75mm; positive scores reflect preference forBD Nano™ PRO and negative scores reflect preference for the comparator. Scores from each of the paired injections (330

GroupValue95% CI
All Study Participants7.302.2 – 12.39
BD Nano™ PRO vs Terumo Nanopass® (Force) Secondary · Scores were collected immediately after each paired injection

Subject perceived force required to deliver dose measured by a relative 5 point Likert scale. The scale ranged from -2 to 2, where positive scores indicated less thumb force required for the BD Nano™ PRO, and negative scores indicated less thumb force for Terumo Nanopass®. Scores from each of the paired injections (330 pairs for all participants) were pooled and a mean was calculated.

GroupValue95% CI
All Study Participants0.2100.07 – 0.35
BD Nano™ PRO vs Terumo Nanopass® (Needle Bending) Secondary · Immediately after injections were completed

Participants reported a visual score of needle bending. A score of at least 2, corresponding to \>10 degrees of bending, was considered an event of a bent needle. The percentage of of bending events (yes/no) was calculated for each groups and the mean difference calculated along with a 95% confidence interval.

GroupValue95% CI
BD Nano™ PRO0.60.2 – 2.5
Terumo Nanopass0.60.2 – 2.2
BD Nano™ PRO vs Terumo Nanopass® (Leakage) Secondary · Immediately after injection

After saline delivery equivalent to 30U of U100 insulin (0.3mL) and subject removal of pen needle from body, study staff used the provided materials and scale to absorb leakage from the pen needle tip and injection site to measure the amount of leakage. Leakage over 0.015g was counted as an event. The percentage of of leakage events (yes/no) was calculated for each groups and the mean difference calculated along with a 95% confidence interval.

GroupValue95% CI
BD Nano™ PRO0.30 – 1.7
Terumo Nanopass1.80.8 – 3.9
Compare BD Nano™ PRO vs Terumo Nanopass® (Total Injection Time) Secondary · Immediately after injections were completed

Time from when injection button fully depressed to when pen needle removed from body. Mean total injection time was calculated for both the BD Nano™ PRO and the Terumo Nanopass®. Scores from each injection (330 for each needle type) were pooled and a mean was calculated. The total injection time for the BD Nano™ PRO and Terumo Nanopass® were compared and the mean difference reported with a 95% confidence interval.

BD NANO
GroupValue95% CI
All Study Participants7.55± 4.75
Terumo
GroupValue95% CI
All Study Participants7.80± 4.62
Compare BD Nano™ PRO vs Terumo Nanopass® (Needle Breaking) Secondary · Immediately after injections were completed

Needle breakage was defined as the patient-end metal cannula being separated into two pieces. The percentage of of breaking events (yes/no) was calculated for each groups and the mean difference calculated along with a 95% confidence interval.

GroupValue95% CI
BD Nano™ PRO00 – 1.1
Terumo Nanopass00 – 1.1
Subject Satisfaction Survey Secondary · Immediately after injections were completed

Each subject was asked to fill out a 4 question survey on the general importance of Injection Pain, Thumb pressure, Leakage and Needle Bending, each question was tabulated. Each participant answered 1 survey about their general preferences and opinions, not regarding either product used in the study.

Injection Pain affects my level of satisfaction
GroupValue95% CI
All Study Participants16
All Study Participants16
All Study Participants16
All Study Participants3
Thumb pressure needed affects my level of satisfac
GroupValue95% CI
All Study Participants10
All Study Participants21
All Study Participants14
All Study Participants7
Post injection leakage increases level of concern
GroupValue95% CI
All Study Participants18
All Study Participants16
All Study Participants16
All Study Participants4
A bent needle increases my level of concern
GroupValue95% CI
All Study Participants23
All Study Participants13
All Study Participants17
All Study Participants1

Sponsor's own description

This is a subject single blinded, block randomized, prospective, single-visit, multi-center study to compare user experiences with BD Nano™ PRO pen needle vs. the thinner commercially available Terumo Nanopass® pen needle. The study will include a minimum of 55 Japanese American study subjects with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes.

Publications & conference data

1 peer-reviewed publication reference this trial (live from Europe PMC):

  1. User experiences with second-generation 32-gauge × 4 mm vs. thinner comparator pen needles: prospective randomized trial.
    Gibney MA, Fitz-Patrick D, Klonoff DC, Whooley S, et al · · 2020 · cited 4× · PMID 32723109 · DOI 10.1080/03007995.2020.1803248

Verify or expand the search:

Other recruiting trials for Diabetes

Currently open trials in the same condition.

Other Becton, Dickinson and Company trials

Trials by the same sponsor.

Verify against primary sources

Data sources for this page

Drug Landscape aggregates and links these public records for informational use only. Always verify against the primary source before clinical or regulatory decisions. Canonical URL: https://druglandscape.com/trial/NCT03878745.

Primary sources · FDA · ClinicalTrials.gov · EMA · SEC EDGAR · ChEMBL · Wikidata · full sourcing