Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Outpatient Randomized Controlled Trials.

Baoqi Zeng, Le Gao, Qingqing Yang, Hao Jia, Feng Sun

Journal: Diabetes care 2023;46(12):2300-2307

PMID: 38011519

Plain Language Summary

plain language summary logo

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterised by insulin deficiency and hyperglycaemia. Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems aim to improve glycaemic control in children and adolescents with T1D. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in outpatient settings for children and adolescents with T1D. This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing AID systems with conventional insulin therapy. Results showed that: - AID systems were associated with an increased percentage of time in range. - The favourable effect was consistent over 3 months (10.46%) and 6 months (10.87%). - AID systems also improved time below range and time above range compared to control treatment. Authors concluded that AID systems are more effective than conventional insulin therapy for children and adolescents with T1D in outpatient settings, both in the short and long term.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The glycemic control of automated insulin delivery (AID) systems in outpatient children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) has not been systematically evaluated.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in children and adolescents in outpatient settings.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched until 4 May 2023. This study was registered with PROSPERO (2023, CRD42023395252).

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials that compared AID systems with conventional insulin therapy in outpatient children and adolescents with T1D and reported continuous glucose monitoring outcomes were selected.

DATA EXTRACTION

Percent time in range (TIR) (3.9-10 mmol/L), time below range (TBR) (<3.9 mmol/L), and time above range (TAR) (>10 mmol/L) were extracted. Data were summarized as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-five trials (1,345 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. AID systems were associated with an increased percentage of TIR (MD, 11.38% [95% CI 9.01-13.76], P < 0.001; high certainty). The favorable effect was consistent whether AID was used over 3 months (10.46% [8.71-12.20]) or 6 months (10.87% [7.11-14.63]). AID systems had a favorable effect on the proportion of TBR (-0.59% [-1.02 to -0.15], P = 0.008; low certainty) or TAR (-12.19% [-14.65 to -9.73], P < 0.001; high certainty) compared with control treatment.

LIMITATIONS

Substantial heterogeneity was observed in most analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

AID systems are more effective than conventional insulin therapy for children and adolescents with T1D in outpatient settings. The favorable effect is consistent both in the short term and long term.

© 2023 by the American Diabetes Association.

Address: Central Laboratory, Peking University Binhai Hospital, Tianjin, China.; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.; Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.; Drug Clinical Trial Institution, Peking University Binhai Hospital, Tianjin, China.; Key Laboratory of Epidemiology of Major Diseases, Peking University, Ministry of Health, Beijing, China.

Patient Centred Factor

Clinical Imbalances

Laboratory Testing

Modifiable Lifestyle Factors

Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.