Abstract Background No randomised controlled trials have directly compared commercially available hybrid automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, and real‐world comparative data remain limited. This study evaluated glycaemic outcomes across three hybrid AID systems in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods This was a retrospective, observational, single‐centre study and included adults with T1D who transitioned from multiple daily injections (MDI) or non‐automated insulin pump therapy to hybrid AID. Data were collected from routinely used clinical data‐sharing platforms and electronic health records. Outcomes compared across systems included time in range (TIR; 3.9–10.0 mmol/L), time below range (TBR; 10.0 and >13.9 mmol/L), glucose management indicator (GMI, %) and coefficient of variation (CV, %). Results A total of 213 participants were included (Medtronic 780G n = 38; Tandem Control‐IQ n = 81; Omnipod 5 n = 94). After adjustment for baseline TIR, diabetes duration, insulin modality and AID use duration 780G users achieved a higher TIR increase (21.1% 95% CI 18.4–23.7) compared to Control‐IQ (10.1% 3.2–17.3, p = 0.010) and Omnipod 5 (15.2% 12.9–17.5, p = 0.002), with corresponding reductions in TAR. Conclusion All three hybrid AID systems were associated with improvements in glycaemic outcomes in real‐world use, supporting the role of AID systems in the management of T1D. Medtronic 780G use was associated with higher TIR increase compared with the other systems; however, these findings are based on measurements from different continuous glucose monitors between AID groups and cannot be used to infer superiority in glycaemic attainment.
Khan et al. (Thu,) studied this question.