» Articles » PMID: 26635489

Evaluation of the Impact of Viscosity, Injection Volume, and Injection Flow Rate on Subcutaneous Injection Tolerance

Overview
Publisher Dove Medical Press
Date 2015 Dec 5
PMID 26635489
Citations 52
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aim: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of fluid injection viscosity in combination with different injection volumes and flow rates on subcutaneous (SC) injection pain tolerance.

Methods: The study was a single-center, comparative, randomized, crossover, Phase I study in 24 healthy adults. Each participant received six injections in the abdomen area of either a 2 or 3 mL placebo solution, with three different fluid viscosities (1, 8-10, and 15-20 cP) combined with two different injection flow rates (0.02 and 0.3 mL/s). All injections were performed with 50 mL syringes and 27G, 6 mm needles. Perceived injection pain was assessed using a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) (0 mm/no pain, 100 mm/extreme pain). The location and depth of the injected fluid was assessed through 2D ultrasound echography images.

Results: Viscosity levels had significant impact on perceived injection pain (P=0.0003). Specifically, less pain was associated with high viscosity (VAS =12.6 mm) than medium (VAS =16.6 mm) or low (VAS =22.1 mm) viscosities, with a significant difference between high and low viscosities (P=0.0002). Target injection volume of 2 or 3 mL was demonstrated to have no significant impact on perceived injection pain (P=0.89). Slow (0.02 mL/s) or fast (0.30 mL/s) injection rates also showed no significant impact on perceived pain during SC injection (P=0.79). In 92% of injections, the injected fluid was located exclusively in SC tissue whereas the remaining injected fluids were found located in SC and/or intradermal layers.

Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that solutions of up to 3 mL and up to 15-20 cP injected into the abdomen within 10 seconds are well tolerated without pain. High viscosity injections were shown to be the most tolerated, whereas injection volume and flow rates did not impact perceived pain.

Citing Articles

Designing a Patient Preference Study on Subcutaneous Medical Devices: Incorporating Health Authority Scientific Advice and Patient Perspectives.

Picci M, Cook N, Jones B, Zhou M, Berlin C, Sturchler C Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2025; .

PMID: 40011380 DOI: 10.1007/s43441-024-00725-3.


A Pilot Open-Label Randomized Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Acceptability of the IntegriMedical® Needle Free Injection System versus a Conventional Needle-Based System in Healthy Volunteers, Using Normal Saline as a Placebo.

Pathan A, Shetty Narasimha K, Naik A, Ranade A Med Devices (Auckl). 2025; 17:525-536.

PMID: 39742081 PMC: 11687312. DOI: 10.2147/MDER.S491883.


A Biologic and Physical Characterization of an Injectable Amniotic Membrane Designed for Treating Diabetic Foot Ulcers.

Velarde K, Arvonen A, Gonzalez T, Diller R Bioengineering (Basel). 2024; 11(11).

PMID: 39593747 PMC: 11591430. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11111087.


Investigation into the Acceptability of Moderate-to-Large Volume Subcutaneous Injections in Healthy Volunteers: Results from a Single-Center Randomized Controlled Study.

Akinseye C, Fiorini A, Jarvis E, Fry M, Raza A, Soleman S Med Devices (Auckl). 2024; 17:369-384.

PMID: 39479340 PMC: 11522010. DOI: 10.2147/MDER.S479507.


A Buffered Local Anesthetic Without Epinephrine: Development, Characterization, and In Vivo Efficacy and Toxicity Analysis.

Uzbelger Feldman D, Laun 2nd B, Patel C, Pande S, Boddu S Pharmaceutics. 2024; 16(8).

PMID: 39204403 PMC: 11360523. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics16081058.


References
1.
Jackisch C, Muller V, Maintz C, Hell S, Ataseven B . Subcutaneous Administration of Monoclonal Antibodies in Oncology. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2014; 74(4):343-349. PMC: 4078128. DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1368173. View

2.
Leveque D . Subcutaneous administration of anticancer agents. Anticancer Res. 2014; 34(4):1579-86. View

3.
Berteau C, Schwarzenbach F, Donazzolo Y, Latreille M, Berube J, Abry H . Evaluation of performance, safety, subject acceptance, and compliance of a disposable autoinjector for subcutaneous injections in healthy volunteers. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2010; 4:379-88. PMC: 2962403. DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s13132. View

4.
Melichar B, Studentova H, Kalabova H, Vitaskova D . Role of subcutaneous formulation of trastuzumab in the treatment of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. Immunotherapy. 2014; 6(7):811-9. DOI: 10.2217/imt.14.50. View

5.
Jezek J, Rides M, Derham B, Moore J, Cerasoli E, Simler R . Viscosity of concentrated therapeutic protein compositions. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2011; 63(13):1107-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2011.09.008. View