Restricted accessReview articleFirst published online 2025-12
The Effectiveness of Telehealth on Glycemic Stability and Quality of Life Among Patients With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize the best available evidence regarding the effectiveness of telehealth on glycemic stability, blood sugar, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
Methods
Nine electronic databases were used for searching for published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted between 2010 and 2022, supplemented by hand search on references of relevant reviews. Two independent reviewers screened, appraised, and extracted data using standardized tools. Meta-analyses were performed using review manager software. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis were conducted.
Results
Twenty-three RCTs were included. Most studies supported the positive effects of telehealth interventions on glycemic stability and blood sugar, varying from small to large effect sizes. However, the pooled effect of QoL was very small. The use of mobile applications and telephone-delivered interventions appeared to be more effective than the internet platform. Studies conducted on young adults with type 1 diabetes and in European countries showed stronger effects.
Conclusions
This review suggested that telehealth interventions had the potential to improve glycemic stability and blood sugar. Health care professionals may adopt telehealth interventions for people with type 1 diabetes. Future research may explore participants’ experiences of the telehealth interventions in Asian countries.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Diabetes Association. 2. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetes-2021. Diabetes Care. 2020;44(suppl 1):S15-S33. doi:10.2337/dc21-S002
2.
American Diabetes Association. 2. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetes-2018. Diabetes Care. 2017;41(suppl 1):S13-S27. doi:10.2337/dc18-S002
HexNBartlettCWrightDTaylorMVarleyD.Estimating the current and future costs of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the UK, including direct health costs and indirect societal and productivity costs. Diabet Med. 2012;29(7):855-862. doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03698.x
5.
CraigMEJonesTWSilinkMPingYJ.Diabetes care, glycemic control, and complications in children with type 1 diabetes from Asia and the Western Pacific Region. J Diabetes Complications. 2007;21(5):280-287. doi:10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2006.04.005
6.
DickinsonJKGuzmanSJMaryniukMD, et al. The use of language in diabetes care and education. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(12):1790-1799. doi:10.2337/dci17-0041
7.
YigazuDMDesseTA.Glycemic control and associated factors among type 2 diabetic patients at Shanan Gibe Hospital, Southwest Ethiopia. BMC Res Notes. 2017;10(1):597. doi:10.1186/s13104-017-2924-y
8.
American Diabetes Association. Glycemic targets: standards of medical care in diabetes 2020. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(suppl 1):S66-S76. doi:10.2337/dc20-S006
9.
TrikkalinouAPapazafiropoulouAKMelidonisA.Type 2 diabetes and quality of life. World J Diabetes. 2017;8(4):120-129. doi:10.4239/wjd.v8.i4.120
10.
PalamenghiLCarlucciMMGraffignaG.Measuring the quality of life in diabetic patients: a scoping review. J Diabetes Res. 2020;2020:5419298. doi:10.1155/2020/5419298
11.
OluchiSEManafRAIsmailSKadir ShaharHMahmudAUdeaniTK.Health related quality of life measurements for diabetes: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(17):1-19. doi:10.3390/ijerph18179245
12.
AyatollahiHHasannezhadMFardHSHaghighiMK.Type 1 diabetes self-management: developing a web-based telemedicine application. Health Inf Manag. 2016;45(1):16-26. doi:10.1177/1833358316639456
13.
BertuzziFStefaniIRivoltaB, et al. Teleconsultation in type 1 diabetes mellitus (TELEDIABE). Acta Diabetol. 2018;55(2):185-192. doi:10.1007/s00592-017-1084-9
14.
LeePAGreenfieldGPappasY.The impact of telehealth remote patient monitoring on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):495. doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3274-8
ScalzoP.From the Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists: the role of the diabetes care and education specialist as a champion of technology integration. Sci Diabetes Self Manag Care. 2021;47(2):120-123. doi:10.1177/0145721721995478
17.
De GrootJWuDFlynnDRobertsonDGrantGSunJ.Efficacy of telemedicine on glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. World J Diabetes. 2021;12(2):170-197. doi:10.4239/wjd.v12.i2.170
18.
HigginsJPTAltmanDGGøtzschePC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928. doi:10.1136/bmj.d5928
19.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71
20.
LiberatiAAltmanDGTetzlaffJ, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700. doi:10.1136/bmj.b2700
Gallardo-GómezDRichardsonRDwanK.Standardized mean differences in meta-analysis: a tutorial. Cochrane Evid Synth Methods. 2024;2:e12047. doi:10.1002/cesm.12047
25.
CohenJ.Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed.Erlbaum; 1998.
26.
KimMMalloryC.Statistics for Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing. 2nd ed. Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2016.
27.
ChatzakisCFlorosDPapagianniM, et al. The beneficial effect of the mobile application Euglyca in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21(11):627-634. doi:10.1089/dia.2019.0170
28.
KotsaniKAntonopoulouVKountouriA, et al. The role of telenursing in the management of diabetes type 1: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;80:29-35. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.01.003
29.
Di BartoloPNicolucciACherubiniVIafuscoDScardapaneMRossiMC. Young patients with type 1 diabetes poorly controlled and poorly compliant with self-monitoring of blood glucose: can technology help? Results of the i-NewTrend randomized clinical trial. Acta Diabetol. 2017;54(4):393-402. doi:10.1007/s00592-017-0963-4
30.
LandauZMazor-AronovitchKBoazM, et al. The effectiveness of internet-based blood glucose monitoring system on improving diabetes control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes. 2012;13(2):203-207. doi:10.1111/j.1399-5448.2011.00800.x
31.
OronTFarfelAMullerI, et al. A remote monitoring system for artificial pancreas support is safe, reliable, and user friendly. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014;16(11):699-705. doi:10.1089/dia.2014.0090
32.
DukeDCWagnerDVUlrichJFreemanKAHarrisMA.Videoconferencing for teens with diabetes: family matters. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016;10(4):816-823. doi:10.1177/1932296816642577
33.
EllisDANaar-KingSChenXMoltzKCunninghamPBIdalski-CarconeA.Multisystemic therapy compared to telephone support for youth with poorly controlled diabetes: findings from a randomized controlled trial. Ann Behav Med. 2012;44(2):207-215. doi:10.1007/s12160-012-9378-1
34.
HeislerMChoiHMaseRLongJAReevesPJ.Effectiveness of technologically enhanced peer support in improving glycemic management among predominantly African American, low-income adults with diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2019;45(3):260-271. doi:10.1177/0145721719844547
35.
McGillDELaffelLMVolkeningLK, et al. Text message intervention for teens with type 1 diabetes preserves HbA1c: results of a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020;22(5):374-382. doi:10.1089/dia.2019.0350
36.
MulvaneySAVaalaSHoodKK, et al. Mobile momentary assessment and biobehavioral feedback for adolescents with type 1 diabetes: feasibility and engagement patterns. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018;20(7):465-474. doi:10.1089/dia.2018.0064
37.
SmithMBAlbanese-O’NeillAYaoYWilkieDJHallerMJKeenanGM.Feasibility of the web-based intervention designed to educate and improve adherence through learning to use continuous glucose monitor (IDEAL CGM) training and follow-up support intervention: randomized controlled pilot study. JMIR Diabetes. 2021;6(1):e15410. doi:10.2196/15410
38.
HanYFaulknerMSFritzH, et al. A pilot randomized trial of text-messaging for symptom awareness and diabetes knowledge in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. J Pediatr Nurs. 2015;30(6):850-861. doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2015.02.002
39.
KleePBussienCCastellsagueM, et al. Use of telemonitoring via a mobile device app reduces HbA1c in type 1 diabetic children and adolescents. In: 57th Annual ESPE Meeting. 2018: 251.
40.
FreemanKADukeDCHarrisMA.Behavioral health care for adolescents with poorly controlled diabetes via Skype: does working alliance remain intact?J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013;7(3):727-735. doi:10.1177/193229681300700318
41.
LehmkuhlHDStorchEACammarataC, et al. Telehealth behavior therapy for the management of type 1 diabetes in adolescents. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010;4(1):199-208. doi:10.1177/193229681000400125
42.
EsmatjesEJansàMRocaD, et al. The efficiency of telemedicine to optimize metabolic control in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus: telemed study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014;16(7):435-441. doi:10.1089/dia.2013.0313
43.
Martínez-SarrieguiIGarcía-SáezGRiglaM, et al. How continuous monitoring changes the interaction of patients with a mobile telemedicine system. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5(1):5-12. doi:10.1177/193229681100500102
44.
HiraniSPRixonLCartwrightMBeynonMNewmanSP; WSD Evaluation Team. The effect of telehealth on quality of life and psychological outcomes over a 12-month period in a diabetes cohort within the whole systems demonstrator cluster randomized trial. JMIR Diabetes. 2017;2(2):e18. doi:10.2196/diabetes.7128
45.
ThabitHPrabhuJNMubitaW, et al. Use of factory-calibrated real-time continuous glucose monitoring improves time in target and HbA1c in a multiethnic cohort of adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: the MILLENNIALS study. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(10):2537-2543. doi:10.2337/dc20-0736
46.
ZhangLHeXShenY, et al. Effectiveness of smartphone app-based interactive management on glycemic control in Chinese patients with poorly controlled diabetes: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(12):e15401. doi:10.2196/15401
47.
GossPWGossJLGossWE.Comparison of alternating home telemedicine consultations with regular face to face consultations in type 1 diabetes. Int J Pediatr Endocrinol. 2015;(suppl 1):P27. doi:10.1186/1687-9856-2015-S1-P27
48.
KassaiBRabilloudMBernouxD, et al. Management of adolescents with very poorly controlled type 1 diabetes by nurses: a parallel group randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2015;16:399. doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0923-7
49.
SoCFChungJW.Telehealth for diabetes self-management in primary healthcare: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24(5):356-364. doi:10.1177/1357633X17700552
