Abstract
BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is the most common chronic autoimmune disease among children and adolescents. Telemedicine has been widely used in the field of chronic disease management and can benefit patients with T1DM. However, existing studies lack high-level evidence related to the effectiveness of telemedicine for glycemic control in children and adolescents with T1DM. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to systematically review the evidence on the effectiveness of telemedicine interventions compared with usual care on glycemic control among children and adolescents with T1DM. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science (all databases), and CINAHL Complete from database inception to May 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of a telemedicine intervention on glycemic control in children and adolescents with T1DM. In total, 2 independent reviewers performed the study selection and data extraction. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Our primary outcome was glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) levels. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, self-monitoring of blood glucose, the incidence of hypoglycemia, and cost-effectiveness. A random-effects model was used for this meta-analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 20 RCTs (1704 participants from 12 countries) were included in the meta-analysis. Only 5% (1/20) of the studies were at high risk of bias. Compared to usual care, telemedicine was found to reduce HbA(1c) levels by 0.22 (95% CI -0.33 to -0.10; P<.001; I(2)=35%). There was an improvement in self-monitoring of blood glucose (mean difference [MD] 0.54, 95% CI -0.72 to 1.80; P=.40; I(2)=67.8%) and the incidence of hypoglycemia (MD -0.15, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.27; P=.49; I(2)=70.7%), although this was not statistically significant. Moreover, telemedicine had no convincing effect on the Diabetes Quality of Life for Youth score (impact of diabetes: P=.59; worries about diabetes: P=.71; satisfaction with diabetes: P=.68), but there was a statistically significant improvement in non-youth-specific quality of life (MD -0.24, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.02; P=.04; I(2)=0%). Subgroup analyses revealed that the effect of telemedicine on HbA(1c) levels appeared to be greater in studies involving children (MD -0.41, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.20; P<.001), studies that lasted <6 months (MD -0.32, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.17; P<.001), studies where providers used smartphone apps to communicate with patients (MD -0.37, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.21; P<.001), and studies with medication dose adjustment (MD -0.25, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.12; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine can reduce HbA(1c) levels and improve quality of life in children and adolescents with T1DM. Telemedicine should be regarded as a useful supplement to usual care to control HbA(1c) levels and a potentially cost-effective mode. Meanwhile, researchers should develop higher-quality RCTs using large samples that focus on hard clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life.