Real‐world glycaemic outcomes of automated insulin delivery in type 1 diabetes: A meta‐analysis
Pooled result · TIR (3.9-10 mmol/L)Result — go to the resultMD 11.61 % 95% CI 10.47–12.76Authors' conclusion
Similar improvements in glycaemic parameters were observed in real-world settings in RCTs using AID systems in T1D. AID systems benefit both children and adults by increasing TIR for both short- and long-term interventions.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with T1D in real-world settings; studies published up until 2 March 2024
- Participants
- 101,704 patients23 before-after studies
- Comparison
- Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems vs conventional insulin therapy
- Outcome
- Percent TIR (3.9-10 mmol/L)
Methodological detailsreal-world settings
- Real-world settings
Pooled result
TIR (3.9-10 mmol/L)
MD
11.61 %
95% CI 10.47–12.76
P < 0.001
AIDvs Conventional insulin therapy
MD 11.61 % (95% CI 10.47–12.76); P < 0.001
As reported in the abstract
Further pooled results
| Outcome | MD (%) (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| TBR (<3.9 mmol/L) | −0.53 (−0.63 to −0.42) | |
| TAR (>10 mmol/L) | −9.65 (−10.63 to −8.67) | |
| HbA1c | −0.42 (−0.47 to −0.37) | |
| −15−10−505Difference, % (linear scale) |
Time in range (TIR) by duration of continuous use and age group
- TIR increase, 6 months
- 11.76%
- TIR increase, 12 months
- 11.33%
- TIR increase, children
- 12.16%
- TIR increase, adults
- 11.04%
Original publication
Real‐world glycaemic outcomes of automated insulin delivery in type 1 diabetes: A meta‐analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab. Published 18 June 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →