Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
A comparison of the usage of an open-source automated insulin delivery system and the MiniMed™ 780 G system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in real-world settings: the AWeSoMe study group
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
A comparison of the usage of an open-source automated insulin delivery system and the MiniMed™ 780 G system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in real-world settings: the AWeSoMe study group
Do you wish to request the book?
A comparison of the usage of an open-source automated insulin delivery system and the MiniMed™ 780 G system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in real-world settings: the AWeSoMe study group
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
A comparison of the usage of an open-source automated insulin delivery system and the MiniMed™ 780 G system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in real-world settings: the AWeSoMe study group
2024
Overview
Purpose
In recent years there has been a noticeable increase in the use of advanced hybrid closed-loop systems (AHCLs) for managing type 1 diabetes (T1D) among youth. However, there is a lack of comparison between the open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) system and the MiniMed™ 780 G system (780 G).
Methods
In this multi-center study, we retrospectively compared selected glycemic ranges of 26 individuals who used open-source AID and 20 individuals who used 780 G (age 11.3 years [IQR 9.3, 12.9] and 13.4 years [IQR 10.9, 16.5], respectively,
p
= 0.069) from system initiation to the most recent visit.
Results
At baseline, the median HbA1c was significantly lower and the time below range (TBR)
<54mg/dL
was significantly higher in the open-source AID group compared to the 780 G group (6.8% [IQR 6.4, 7.1] vs. 7.4% [IQR 6.9, 8.6],
p
= 0.006 and (1.0% [IQR 0.5, 2.8] vs. 0.0% [0.0, 1.0],
p
= 0.014), respectively; the median time in range (TIR
70–180mg/dL
) was similar (
p
= 0.068). After a median duration of 10.9 months on AHCLs the reduction of HbA1c was similar ( ~ 0.3%). The time spent in the hypoglycemic ranges was longer among users of the open-source AID compared to 780 G (TBR
54–70mg/dL
4.2% [IQR 2.6, 7.3] vs. 2.0% [1.0, 4.0],
p
= 0.005) and TBR
<54mg/dL
1.1% [IQR 0.4, 2.3] vs. 0.0 [0.0, 1.0],
p
= 0.001).
Conclusions
Both AHCLs similarly improved HbA1c and TIR
70–180mg/dL
. The open-source AID youth had better glycemic control but spent longer time in the hypoglycemic range. These findings must be considered when choosing the use of AHCL technologies.
Publisher
Springer US,Springer Nature B.V
Subject
/ Age
/ Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - methods
/ Child
/ Diabetes
/ Diabetes mellitus (insulin dependent)
/ Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - blood
/ Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - drug therapy
/ Female
/ Glucose
/ Glycated Hemoglobin - analysis
/ Humanities and Social Sciences
/ Humans
/ Hypoglycemic Agents - administration & dosage
/ Hypoglycemic Agents - therapeutic use
/ Insulin
/ Insulin - administration & dosage
/ Male
/ Males
/ Medicine
/ Science
/ Youth
