Changes in 90-Day Time in Range Among Youth With Type 1 Diabetes Initiating Different Automated Insulin Delivery Systems
Authors' conclusion
There are no clinically significant differences in 90-day TIR among youth with T1D initiating the 2 most commonly used AID systems. Patient preference and shared decision making should continue to guide the selection of AID systems.
Study context
- Population
- Youth <21 years with T1D starting OP5 or Control IQ (CIQ), January 2020–December 2023, with ≥70% continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) active time
- Participants
- 428 participants
- Exposure
- OP5 vs CIQ
- OP5n = 214
- CIQn = 214reference
- Outcome
- Change in TIR, adjusted for covariates
- Follow-up
- 90 days
Methodological detailssingle-centre
- Single-centre
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Change in TIR
OP5
11.8
CI 10.4–13.3 · percentage points
CIQ
9.8
CI 8.3–11.2 · percentage points
P = 0.08
- 90-day time in range (TIR) increased in both groups
- P < 0.001
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Baseline TIR · similar
P = 0.70
Transitioned from MDI · baseline · more likely with OP5
P < 0.001
T1D duration · baseline · shorter with OP5
P < 0.001
90-day TIR by baseline TIR category
- No between-group differences in 90-day TIR according to categorical baseline TIR
Original publication
Changes in 90-Day Time in Range Among Youth With Type 1 Diabetes Initiating Different Automated Insulin Delivery Systems. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. Published 15 January 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →