Comparison of Glycemic Control between Intensive Insulin Regimen and Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin infusion: A Meta-Analysis Report of Type-1 Diabetics from Randomized Controlled Trials

K. Aziz, A. Othman
{"title":"Comparison of Glycemic Control between Intensive Insulin Regimen and Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin infusion: A Meta-Analysis Report of Type-1 Diabetics from Randomized Controlled Trials","authors":"K. Aziz, A. Othman","doi":"10.1101/2020.06.01.20119693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Achieving glycemic control and targets are challenging in type-1 diabetes management. To achieve this, intensive insulin therapy or multiple daily injections (MDI) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or pump therapy have been used in various health care settings. However, there has been a debate on their superiority. Some of researchers have recommended MDI, while others SCII. We compared MDI with CSII by a literature search. We have conducted mata-analysis for MDI and CSII on ten randomized controlled trials on 809 type-1 diabetics 809, MDI (N=394) or CSII (N=415). Heterogeneity between trials was quantified by conventional Q-statistic (Cochran heterogeneity statistic) and Higgins I2 statistic with 0-40% representing negligible heterogeneity, 30-60% moderate heterogeneity, 50-90% substantial heterogeneity and 75-100% considerable heterogeneity. tau-squared ({tau}2) was used to observe between-study random-effects variance. Meta Analyst software was used to analyze the data and to conduct meta-analysis. SPSS was used to analyze HbA1c student t-test for MDI and CSII. A random-effect analysis (( DerSimonian-Laird method) performed on ten studies found that the percentage of HbA1c was lower in patients receiving CSII compared with those receiving MDI; standardized mean difference (SMD) was 0.441 , 95% confidence interval 0.267 to 0.616, p < 0.001; equivalent to a difference of 0.39%, favoring CSII. I2 statistic was 20.9 ; {tau}2= 0.016; Q=11.378 with df = 9, indicating that heterogeneity was not significant (heterogeneity p-value = 0.251). Patients on CSII demonstrated significantly lower values (8.2 SD 0.72 versus 7.73 SD 0.72 ; p-value <0.001 respectively). This statistical and meta-analysis favors the usage of insulin pump therapy. We concluded that patient centered approach should be used while selecting the patients for insulin pump (CSII) or MDI.","PeriodicalId":90543,"journal":{"name":"International journal of diabetology & vascular disease research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of diabetology & vascular disease research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.01.20119693","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Achieving glycemic control and targets are challenging in type-1 diabetes management. To achieve this, intensive insulin therapy or multiple daily injections (MDI) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or pump therapy have been used in various health care settings. However, there has been a debate on their superiority. Some of researchers have recommended MDI, while others SCII. We compared MDI with CSII by a literature search. We have conducted mata-analysis for MDI and CSII on ten randomized controlled trials on 809 type-1 diabetics 809, MDI (N=394) or CSII (N=415). Heterogeneity between trials was quantified by conventional Q-statistic (Cochran heterogeneity statistic) and Higgins I2 statistic with 0-40% representing negligible heterogeneity, 30-60% moderate heterogeneity, 50-90% substantial heterogeneity and 75-100% considerable heterogeneity. tau-squared ({tau}2) was used to observe between-study random-effects variance. Meta Analyst software was used to analyze the data and to conduct meta-analysis. SPSS was used to analyze HbA1c student t-test for MDI and CSII. A random-effect analysis (( DerSimonian-Laird method) performed on ten studies found that the percentage of HbA1c was lower in patients receiving CSII compared with those receiving MDI; standardized mean difference (SMD) was 0.441 , 95% confidence interval 0.267 to 0.616, p < 0.001; equivalent to a difference of 0.39%, favoring CSII. I2 statistic was 20.9 ; {tau}2= 0.016; Q=11.378 with df = 9, indicating that heterogeneity was not significant (heterogeneity p-value = 0.251). Patients on CSII demonstrated significantly lower values (8.2 SD 0.72 versus 7.73 SD 0.72 ; p-value <0.001 respectively). This statistical and meta-analysis favors the usage of insulin pump therapy. We concluded that patient centered approach should be used while selecting the patients for insulin pump (CSII) or MDI.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
强化胰岛素方案和持续皮下胰岛素输注的血糖控制比较:一项随机对照试验1型糖尿病患者的荟萃分析报告
在1型糖尿病管理中,实现血糖控制和目标具有挑战性。为了实现这一点,强化胰岛素治疗或每日多次注射(MDI)和连续皮下胰岛素输注(CSII)或泵治疗已在各种医疗保健环境中使用。然而,关于他们的优越性一直存在争议。一些研究人员建议使用MDI,而另一些研究人员则建议使用SCII。我们通过文献检索将MDI与CSII进行了比较。我们对809名1型糖尿病患者809、MDI(N=394)或CSII(N=415)进行了10项随机对照试验,对MDI和CSII进行了mata分析。试验之间的异质性通过常规Q统计量(Cochran异质性统计量)和Higgins I2统计量进行量化,0-40%代表可忽略的异质性,30-60%代表中度异质性,50-90%代表实质异质性,75-100%代表相当异质性。τ平方({tau}2)用于观察研究之间的随机效应方差。Meta Analyst软件用于分析数据并进行荟萃分析。SPSS用于分析HbA1c学生MDI和CSII的t检验。对10项研究进行的随机效应分析(DerSimonian-Laird法)发现,接受CSII的患者的HbA1c百分比低于接受MDI的患者;标准化平均差(SMD)为0.441,95%置信区间为0.267至0.616,p<0.001;相当于0.39%的差异,有利于CSII。I2统计量为20.9;{tau}2=0.016;Q=11.378,df=9,表明异质性不显著(异质性p值=0.251)。接受CSII的患者表现出显著较低的值(分别为8.2 SD 0.72和7.73 SD 0.72;p值<0.001)。这项统计和荟萃分析支持使用胰岛素泵治疗。我们得出的结论是,在选择胰岛素泵(CSII)或MDI患者时,应采用以患者为中心的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Inchoate Disaster of Covid-19: A Systematic Review on Risk Factors Triggering Morbidity and Fatality Progression Use Of Sodium - Glucose Co - Transporter - 2 Inhibitors In Hospitalized Patients With Acute Heart Failure Comparison of Glycemic Control between Intensive Insulin Regimen and Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin infusion: A Meta-Analysis Report of Type-1 Diabetics from Randomized Controlled Trials TRACK Implementation among Bangladeshi Population Association between High Sensitive-C Reactive Protein and Lipid Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Apparently Healthy Nigerian Young Adults
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1