Are you interested in learning more about Continuous Syringe F-Type wholesale? Contact us today to secure an expert consultation!
Continuous veterinary injection syringe wholesale adjustable continuous injection syringe vaccine device for chicken, pig, cattle and sheep
Product Specification
Product name
Continuous veterinary injection syringe
material
Polymer plastic
Capacity
1ml 2ml 5ml
weight
100g
Feature
High Accuracy
Advantage
Can be reused many times
Product Usage
used for injection of liquid medicine for pigs, cattle, sheep, chickens and other livestock and poultry
Application
livestock farm, poultry farm
FEATURE:
1. HIGH QUALITY MATERIAL: The syringe is made of plastic material, which is safe, and has no harm to animal health.
2. ACCURATE DOSE: This veterinary continuous syringe is accurately dosed and marked with a clear scale to reduce liquid waste.
3. PREVENT LEAKAGE: The veterinary syringe is well sealed, and the interface of each structure is tightly connected to prevent liquid leakage.
4. EASY TO OPERATE: The syringe is easy to use, with the grip mode, it can be operated with one hand, which is convenient and labor saving.
5. BOTTLE INSERTION DESIGN: Continuous injection can be achieved without manual inhalation, using plastic bottle for longer service life.
6. WIDE RANGE OF APPLICATIONS: continuous syringes are suitable for poultry and livestock such as pigs, cattle and goats.
OPERATION INSTRUCTION:
1.Fill the sink with warm soapy water.
2.Unscrew the knoband soak the syringe and handle in soapy water separately.
3.Soak for 5 to 6 minutes.
4.Remove the syringes and handle and assemble them.
5.Put the syringe in soapy water and pump the water sever altimes to wash.
6.Pour out the soapy water and refill with clean water.
7.Put the syringe in clean water and apply the water for several washes, letitdry, and then you can use it again.
APPLICATION OF CONTINUOUS INJECTION SYRINGE:
If you are looking for more details, kindly visit Continuous Syringe manufacturer.
OUR COMPANY:
PACKAGING & DELIVERY
We can provide ship ordering, cargo consolidation, customs declaration, shipping documents and bulk delivery services at the port of shipment.
FAQ
Q: When can I get the price?
A: Usually we will quote within 8 hours after receiving your inquiry.
Q: What is your payment term?
A: A 30% deposit is required before production, and 70% of the balance needs to be settled before shipment.
Q: Can I request to change the form of packaging and transportation?
A: Yes, we can change the form of packaging and transportation according to your requirements, but you must bear the costs and spreads incurred during this period.
In this cross-sectional study, including 737 subjects (406 pen users, 331 syringe-vial users) with T2DM injecting insulin at least once a day for at least one year, insulin pens were simpler and more convenient to use and safe but expensive than vial syringes. Glycemic control was comparable between the two groups.
The company is the world&#;s best Continuous Syringe cost supplier. We are your one-stop shop for all needs. Our staff are highly-specialized and will help you find the product you need.
Most people with diabetes inject insulin with a syringe or pen as the insulin delivery method; other methods of insulin delivery, including insulin inhalers, insulin pumps, or automated insulin delivery devices, are seldom used. Delivering insulin through either insulin pens or syringes can safely and effectively lower blood glucose. The factors influencing the decision to choose among delivery systems include patient preferences, cost, insulin type, dosing regimen, and self-management capabilities [19]. In a meta-analysis mainly comprising the adults with T2DM, the pen devices were superior to syringe vials in terms of mean HbA1c change, hypoglycemic episodes, adherence, and persistence to insulin, although no difference was observed in the number of patients achieving glycemic target (HbA1c&#;<&#;7%). There was a tendency to favor pen devices, and using pens improved the quality of life [20].
In this study, we observed that patients using the insulin pen device had fewer missed doses and found it easier to calibrate the dose, inject insulin, and store their pen device than syringe users, making pen devices simpler to use. Singh et al. had a similar observation in Indian subjects with T2DM treated with insulin injections [11]. A higher percentage of Lebanese insulin pen users (95.2%) found the method easy to use compared to insulin syringe users (46.7%) [12]. Compared with vials and syringes, pens were easier to use and operate and demonstrated superior dose accuracy in a study by Ignaut et al. [13]. Korytkowski et al. also observed that it is easier to use overall and found the insulin dose scale on the pen easier to read than the vial/syringe [14]. Insulin pens may allow people with vision impairment or dexterity issues to dose insulin accurately [21].
Pen devices were also found more convenient to carry and use outside the home, with less time and fewer steps involved in the injection process than syringes in this study; the findings are similar to Singh et al. [11]. Compared to syringes, patients found it more discreet to use pen devices in public places, and consequently, they felt greater lifestyle flexibility with pens [14, 21]. In a study, 85.7% of pen users found it more convenient to shift to pens, and 86.7% of syringe users would want to change the pen if it had the exact cost [12].
Although the number of episodes of hypoglycemia was comparable between pen and syringe-vial groups, insulin pen users reported less pain during injection, fewer incidents of bruising at injection sites, fewer hypoglycemic episodes, and fewer occasions of accidental breaking of insulin devices, making the pen safer to use. These results concord with the findings of Singh et al. [11]. The pain involved in the self-injection of insulin is partially related to the characteristics of the needle, particularly its diameter. Pen needles may be sharper and thinner than syringe needles because they do not have to penetrate the insulin vial stopper before injection [21]. Patients in several studies reported less injection pain associated with insulin pen devices than with vial syringes [12, 21]. Like us, Ahmann et al. found comparable incidences of hypoglycemia in the two groups [15]. Contrary to us, most studies reported a statistically significant difference in hypoglycemic incidences favoring pen devices [20, 22]. Not all studies reported superior safety profiles for insulin pens over syringes; similar safety profiles in the two groups are reported by Korytkowski et al. during treatment periods with basal insulin glargine [14].
Overall, glycemic control was unsatisfactory in this study; the median HbA1c was 8.8%, and only 6.6% achieved the target HbA1c of <&#;7%. Insulin pen and syringe users had similar HbA1c levels and proportions to subjects at different stages of glycemic control. Insulin pens generally show equivalence or minor improvements in glycemic outcomes compared to using vial syringes. Lower HbA1c levels among pen users than syringe users have been reported in some studies [11, 14, 22]. The pen group also showed a more significant reduction in HbA1c in 24 weeks of follow-up in a study by Machry et al. [16]. Ahmann et al. reported no difference between the two groups in the percentage of patients that achieved HbA1c&#;<&#;7% (37.7% vs. 37%; p&#;=&#;0.89) after a 40-week follow-up [15]. A meta-analysis showed a non-statistically significant trend toward pen devices in the percentage of patients who reached HbA1c&#;<&#;7% [20]. So, it is tough to comment whether pen devices offer better glycemic control than syringe use. In addition to the use of specific insulin devices, many factors affect glycemic control, which may explain such heterogenicity of the study results.
If you are looking for more details, kindly visit Husbandry Apparatus for sale.
Using pen devices for insulin administration is more expensive than disposable syringe devices in terms of average medical expense per month, the total cost of insulin therapy per month, and the cost per unit of insulin used, according to the current study. Vials are cheaper than pen cartridges. Though many insulin types are available for purchase as pens or vials, others may only be available in one form or another, and there may be cost differences between them [19, 23]. Analog insulins are costlier than human insulins and more frequently injected with pen devices which may be associated with the higher cost of pen use [24]. Prescription costs of syringes were lower, and expenses for pens were higher in patients who were switched from the syringe to pen versus those who remained on syringe therapy [25]. Other studies also identified that treatment using pen devices was costlier when compared to using syringes [11, 22]. Despite the higher prescription costs of insulin pens than vial syringes, previous studies reported similar or even lower all-cause and diabetes-related total annualized healthcare costs [17, 22, 25]. Studies indicated that insulin pen devices are associated with improved adherence and persistence with therapy instead of vial syringes. The healthcare resource utilization and costs associated with them decreased with the use of pen devices compared to vial syringes [17, 18, 21, 26]. These are behind the users&#; higher preference for pens over vial syringes and more robust recommendations for pens over vial syringes by healthcare professionals [13,14,15, 21]. This higher preference for pens is associated with an increasing use trend, while insulin vial syringes declined in parallel [23].
The major limitation of this study is that we used a non-validated questionnaire. The questionnaire was administered by multiple investigators, which could allow for bias in the scoring. Moreover, the observed difference in the scores between the two groups still waits to be clinically translated. We analyzed the short-term (one month) cost for insulin and total treatment cost, restraining us from comparing the long-term cost-effectiveness of pens and vials-syringes. Furthermore, we did not consider the type of insulins used (i.e., human or analog, originator or biosimilar or non-comparable biologics, the manufacturer of the insulin), which may influence the insulin-related and total treatment cost. We also did not investigate the preference for and persistence of either modality of injecting insulin.
If you want to learn more, please visit our website Husbandry Apparatus supplier.