Effects of Modern Glucose Monitoring and Insulin Delivery Technologies on Patient-Reported Outcomes and Experiences in Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

To assess the effect of diabetes technologies on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in type 1 diabetes (T1D).

评估糖尿病技术对1型糖尿病（T1D）患者报告的结果测量（PROMs）的影响。

data_sources

Cochrane Library CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for relevant articles from 2013 to August 2025.

检索了Cochrane图书馆CENTRAL、Embase、MEDLINE、Scopus和Web of Science，以获取2013年至2025年8月的相关文章。

study_selection

We included longitudinal diabetes technology studies assessing validated PROMs in nonpregnant adults with T1D.

我们纳入了评估非孕妇成年1型糖尿病患者经过验证的PROMs的纵向糖尿病技术研究。

data_extraction

Study characteristics and PROM data were extracted, and standardized mean differences (SMDs) for PROs were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.

研究特征和患者报告结果(PROM)数据被提取出来，并使用随机效应荟萃分析对患者报告结局(PROs)的标准平均差异(SMDs)进行了汇总。

data_synthesis

We identified 4,885 articles, comprising 81 independent studies (n = 19,148 participants) and 70 different PROMs.

我们识别了4,885篇文章，包括81项独立研究(n = 19,148参与者)和70种不同的PROMs。

The Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS) was most commonly used (k = 39 studies), followed by the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (status [DTSQs] or change version [DTSQc]; k = 38), Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS; k = 25), and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scale (k = 24).

低血糖恐惧调查问卷（HFS）是最常用的（k = 39项研究），其次是糖尿病治疗满意度问卷（状态[DTSQs]或变化版本[DTSQc]；k = 38），糖尿病困扰量表（DDS；k = 25），以及糖尿病问题区域（PAID）量表（k = 24）。

Technology use was associated with lower HFS total score compared with control (SMD -0.177; 95% CI -0.319, -0.036; P = 0.014; I2 = 0.0%), with the largest effect observed in automated insulin device users.

技术使用与对照组相比，与较低的HFS总分相关（SMD -0.177; 95% CI -0.319, -0.036; P = 0.014; I2 = 0.0%），在自动胰岛素设备用户中观察到最大的效果。

A moderate positive effect of diabetes technologies was observed on DTSQs and DTSQc scores (SMD 0.429; 95% CI 0.206, 0.653; P < 0.001; I2 = 72.3%), with a small to moderate reduction in DDS and PAID scores (SMD -0.265; 95% CI -0.363, -0.166; P < 0.001; I2 = 0.0%).

观察到糖尿病技术对DTSQs和DTSQc评分有中等程度的正面影响（SMD 0.429; 95% 置信区间 0.206, 0.653; P < 0.001; I2 = 72.3%），对DDS和PAID评分有小到中等程度的降低（SMD -0.265; 95% 置信区间 -0.363, -0.166; P < 0.001; I2 = 0.0%）。

limitations

Differences in type of technology, varied use and incomplete reporting of PROMs, and different duration of studies.

技术类型的不同、使用方式的差异以及PROMs的不完整报告和研究持续时间的不同。

Conclusions

Diabetes technologies offer psychological benefits in adults with T1D.

糖尿病技术在成年1型糖尿病患者中提供了心理上的益处。

The large number of reported PROMs suggests a need to standardize their use.

大量报告的患者报告结果（PROMs）表明有必要标准化其使用。