PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

David Hassman

Publications and source records attributed to David Hassman.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

A multicenter, open-label, randomized, two-period crossover trial comparing glycemic control, satisfaction, and preference achieved with a 31 gauge x 6 mm needle versus a 29 gauge x 12.7 mm needle in obese patients with diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Optimal needle length for subcutaneous insulin injection may differ for obese and nonobese patients, which could affect management of diabetes mellitus (DM). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether 31 gauge (G) x 6 mm (shorter) needles are appropriate alternatives to 29 G x 12.7 mm (longer) needles in obese patients with DM. METHODS: A multicenter, open-label, randomized, 2-period crossover trial was conducted in insulin-treated patients with type 1 or 2 DM with body mass index >or=30 kg/m(2) and glycosylated hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) concentration <or=10%. All patients used the same injection device and were randomized to receive 12 weeks of therapy with 1 injection site (thigh or abdomen) and 1 of the 2 needle lengths. Patients used the same injection site but the alternate needle during the second 12-week period. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (31 men, 31 women; mean [SD] age, 50.5 [10.6] years; age range, 20-73 years) received treatment. Fifty-six patients completed all 24 weeks of treatment. No differences in glycemic control were found. Double-blind assessments of pain scores and leakage measurements, and results from the World Health Organization Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire and most sections of the Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (ITSQ), indicated no differences. However, patients indicated greater satisfaction with the shorter needle on the ITSQ (P < 0.001). The most common adverse event was injection-site bruising (51% [30/59] for the longer needle vs 34% [21/61] for the shorter needle; P = NS). Eighty-nine percent of patients (49/55) preferred the shorter needle (P < 0.001), and 76% (42/55) had a strong, very strong, or extremely strong preference for it. CONCLUSIONS: In obese patients, use of 31 G x 6 mm and 29 G x 12.7 mm needles produced comparable HbA(1c) values, double-blind pain and leakage scores, convenience, and ease of use. However, patients preferred the shorter needle.

Adult↗

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe coadministered with pravastatin in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe 10 mg administered with pravastatin in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS AND RESULTS: After dietary stabilization, 2-12 week screening/washout period, and 4-week, single-blind, placebo lead-in period, 538 patients with baseline LDL-C > or =3.8 to < or =6.5 mmol/l and TG < or =4.0 mmol/l were randomized to one of eight possible treatments administered daily for 12 weeks: ezetimibe 10mg; pravastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg; ezetimibe 10 mg plus pravastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg; or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was percent reduction in LDL-C from baseline to study endpoint for ezetimibe 10 mg plus pravastatin (pooled doses) compared to pravastatin alone (pooled doses) and ezetimibe alone. The combined use of ezetimibe and pravastatin resulted in significant incremental reductions in LDL-C and TG compared to pooled pravastatin alone (p<0.01). Coadministration therapy reduced LDL-C by 34-41%, TG by 21-23%, and increased HDL-C by 7.8-8.4%, depending on the dose of pravastatin. The combined regimen was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to pravastatin alone and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: When coadministered with pravastatin, ezetimibe provided significant incremental reductions in LDL-C and TG and was well tolerated with a safety profile similar to pravastatin alone.

Adult↗