{"title":"MDI versus CSII in Chinese adults with type 1 diabetes in a real-world situation: based on propensity score matching method.","authors":"Jian Yu, Hong Wang, Min Zhu, Jingjing Xu","doi":"10.1186/s12955-024-02263-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Compared with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI), continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is significantly more expensive and has not been widely used in Chinese type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients. So there are still significant knowledge gaps regarding clinical and patient-reported outcomes in China.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aims to compare the glycated hemoglobin (HbA<sub>1C</sub>), insulin therapy related quality of life (ITR-QOL), fear of hypoglycemia (FOH) of adult T1DM patients treated with MDI and CSII based on propensity score matching in real-world conditions in China.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four hundred twenty adult T1DM patients who were treated with MDI or CSII continuously for more than 12 months in a national metabolic center from June 2021 to June 2023 were selected as the study subjects. Their QOL and FOH were evaluated with Insulin Therapy Related Quality of Life Measure Questionnaire-Chinese version (ITR-QOL-CV) and the Chinese Version Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-Worry Scale (CHFSII-WS), and their HbA<sub>1C</sub> were collected at the same time. Potential confounding variables between the two groups were matched using propensity score matching.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 420 patients included in the study, 315 were in MDI group and 105 were in CSII group. 102 pairs were successfully matched. After matching, the total score of ITR-QOL-CV scale in CSII group was significantly higher than that in MDI group (87.08 ± 13.53 vs. 80.66 ± 19.25, P = 0.006). Among them, the dimensions of daily life, social life, and psychological state were all statistically different (P < 0.05). The scores of CHFSII-WS (8.33 ± 3.49 vs. 11.77 ± 5.27, P = 0.003) and HbA<sub>1C</sub> (7.19 ± 1.33% vs. 7.71 ± 1.93%, P = 0.045) in CSII group were lower than those in MDI group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>25.0% of T1DM adults are treated with CSII. Compared with adult T1DM patients treated with MDI, those treated with CSII have higher ITR-QOL, less FoH, and better control of HbA<sub>1C</sub> in real-world conditions in China. Therefore, regardless of economic factors, CSII is recommended for adult T1DM patients to optimize the therapeutic effect and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":12980,"journal":{"name":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","volume":"22 1","pages":"47"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11170850/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-024-02263-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Compared with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI), continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is significantly more expensive and has not been widely used in Chinese type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients. So there are still significant knowledge gaps regarding clinical and patient-reported outcomes in China.
Aims: This study aims to compare the glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C), insulin therapy related quality of life (ITR-QOL), fear of hypoglycemia (FOH) of adult T1DM patients treated with MDI and CSII based on propensity score matching in real-world conditions in China.
Methods: Four hundred twenty adult T1DM patients who were treated with MDI or CSII continuously for more than 12 months in a national metabolic center from June 2021 to June 2023 were selected as the study subjects. Their QOL and FOH were evaluated with Insulin Therapy Related Quality of Life Measure Questionnaire-Chinese version (ITR-QOL-CV) and the Chinese Version Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-Worry Scale (CHFSII-WS), and their HbA1C were collected at the same time. Potential confounding variables between the two groups were matched using propensity score matching.
Results: Of the 420 patients included in the study, 315 were in MDI group and 105 were in CSII group. 102 pairs were successfully matched. After matching, the total score of ITR-QOL-CV scale in CSII group was significantly higher than that in MDI group (87.08 ± 13.53 vs. 80.66 ± 19.25, P = 0.006). Among them, the dimensions of daily life, social life, and psychological state were all statistically different (P < 0.05). The scores of CHFSII-WS (8.33 ± 3.49 vs. 11.77 ± 5.27, P = 0.003) and HbA1C (7.19 ± 1.33% vs. 7.71 ± 1.93%, P = 0.045) in CSII group were lower than those in MDI group.
Conclusions: 25.0% of T1DM adults are treated with CSII. Compared with adult T1DM patients treated with MDI, those treated with CSII have higher ITR-QOL, less FoH, and better control of HbA1C in real-world conditions in China. Therefore, regardless of economic factors, CSII is recommended for adult T1DM patients to optimize the therapeutic effect and outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain.
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes considers original manuscripts on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) assessment for evaluation of medical and psychosocial interventions. It also considers approaches and studies on psychometric properties of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures, including cultural validation of instruments if they provide information about the impact of interventions. The journal publishes study protocols and reviews summarising the present state of knowledge concerning a particular aspect of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures. Reviews should generally follow systematic review methodology. Comments on articles and letters to the editor are welcome.