Dataset Information

Economic evaluations of gestational diabetes mellitus screening: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This study aims to find evidence of the cost-effectiveness of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) screening and assess the quality of current economic evaluations which have shown different conclusions with a variation in screening methods, data sources, outcome indicators, and implementation in diverse organizational contexts.

Search strategy

Embase, Medline, Web of Science, HTA, and NHSEED databases were searched till June 2019.

Selection criteria

Studies on economic evaluation reporting both cost and health outcomes of GDM screening programs in English language.

Data collection and analysis

The quality of the studies was assessed using Drummond's checklist. The general characteristics, main assumptions, and results of the economic evaluations were summarized.

Main results

Our search yielded ten eligible economic evaluations with different screening strategies comparison in different settings and perspectives. The selected papers scored 81% (68%-97%) on the items in Drummond's checklist on average. In general, a screening program is cost-effective (C-E) or even dominant over no screening. The 1-step screening, with more cases detected, is more likely to be C-E than the 2-step screening. Universal screening is more likely to be C-E than screening targeting the high-risk population. Parameters affecting cost-effectiveness include: diagnosis criteria, epidemiological characteristics of the population, efficacy of screening and treatment, and costs.

Conclusions

Most studies found GDM screening to be cost-effective, though uncertainties remain due to many factors. The quality assessment identified weaknesses in the economic evaluations in terms of integrating existing data, measuring costs and consequences, analyzing perspectives, and adjusting for uncertainties.

SUBMITTER: Mo X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7878709 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Economic Evaluations of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Screening: A Systematic Review.

Mo Xiuting X Gai Tobe Ruoyan R Takahashi Yoshimitsu Y Arata Naoko N Liabsuetrakul Tippawan T Nakayama Takeo T Mori Rintaro R

Journal of epidemiology 20201017 3

<h4>Background</h4>This study aims to find evidence of the cost-effectiveness of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) screening and assess the quality of current economic evaluations, which have shown different conclusions with a variation in screening methods, data sources, outcome indicators, and implementation in diverse organizational contexts.<h4>Methods</h4>Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Health Technology Assessment, database, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database datab ...[more]

PMID: 32448822

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Guidelines for screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have been updated in the past several years, and various inconsistencies exist across these guidelines. Moreover, the quality of these updated guidelines has not been clarified. We thus conducted this systematic review to evaluate the relationship between the quality and detailed recommendations of these guidelines. DATA SOURCES:The Guidelines International Network Library, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) database, the Medline database, the Embase and the National Guidelines Clearinghouse were searched for guidelines containing recommendations on screening and diagnosis strategies for GDM between 2009 and November 2018. METHODS:Guidelines included a target group of women with GDM, and contained recommendations for screening and diagnostic strategies for GDM were included in the present systematic review. Reviewers summarised recommendations on screening and diagnosis strategies from each guideline and rated the quality of guidelines by using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. RESULTS:A total of 459 citations were collected by the preliminary literature selection, and 16 guidelines that met the inclusion criteria were assessed. The inconsistencies of the guidelines mainly focus on the screening process (one step vs two step) and criteria of oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) (International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups [IADPSG] vs CarpenterandCoustan). Guidelines with higher AGREE scores usually recommend a one-step OGTT strategy with IADPSG criteria between 24 and 28 gestational weeks, and the majority of these guidelines likely to select evidence by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. CONCLUSIONS:The guidelines of WHO-2013, NICE-2015, American Diabetes Association-2018, Endocrine Society-2013, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada-2016, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics-2015, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists-2018, United States Preventive Services Task Force-2014 and IADPSG-2015 are strongly recommended in the present evaluation, according to the AGREE II criteria. Guidelines with higher quality tend to recommend a one-step 75 g OGTT strategy with IADPSG criteria between 24 and 28 gestational weeks.

Project description:BackgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is any degree of impaired glucose tolerance first recognised during pregnancy. Most women with GDM revert to normal glucose metabolism after delivery of their babies; however, they are at risk of developing type 2 diabetes later in life as are their offspring. Determining a country's GDM prevalence can assist with policy guidelines regarding GDM screening and management, and can highlight areas requiring research. This systematic review assesses GDM prevalence in Africa.Methods and findingsThree electronic databases were searched without language restrictions; PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. Thirty-one search terms were searched. Eligible articles defined GDM, stated what GDM screening approaches were employed and reported GDM prevalence. The reporting quality and risk of bias within each study was assessed. The PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews were followed. The literature search identified 466 unique records. Sixty full text articles were reviewed of which 14 were included in the systematic review. One abstract, for which the full text article could not be obtained, was also included. Information regarding GDM classification, screening methods and prevalence was obtained for six African countries; Ethiopia (n = 1), Morocco (n = 1), Mozambique (n = 1), Nigeria (n = 6), South Africa (n= 4) and Tanzania (n = 1). Prevalence figures ranged from 0% (Tanzania) to 13.9% (Nigeria) with some studies focussing on women with GDM risk factors. Most studies utilised the two hour 75 g oral glucose tolerance test and applied the World Health Organization's diagnostic criteria.ConclusionsSix countries, equating to 11% of the African continent, were represented in this systematic review. This indicates how little is known about GDM in Africa and highlights the need for further research. Considering the increasing public health burden of obesity and type 2 diabetes, it is essential that the extent of GDM is understood in Africa to allow for effective intervention programmes.

Project description:Biomarkers commonly assessed in prenatal screening have been associated with a number of adverse perinatal and birth outcomes. However, it is not clear whether first trimester measurements of prenatal screening biomarkers are associated with subsequent risk of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). We aimed to systematically review and statistically summarize studies assessing the relationship between first trimester prenatal screening biomarker levels and GDM development. We comprehensively searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Scopus (from inception through January 2018) and manually searched the reference lists of all relevant articles. We included original, published, observational studies examining the association of first trimester pregnancy associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) and/or free β-human chorionic gonadotropin (free β-hCG) levels with GDM diagnosis. Mean differences were calculated comparing PAPP-A and free β-hCG multiples of median (MoM) levels between women who developed GDM and those who did not and were subsequently pooled using two-sided random-effects models. Our meta-analysis of 13 studies on PAPP-A and nine studies on free β-hCG indicated that first trimester MoM levels for both biomarkers were lower in women who later developed GDM compared to women who remained normoglycemic throughout pregnancy (MD -0.17; 95% CI -0.24, -0.10; MD -0.04; 95% CI -0.07-0.01). There was no evidence for between-study heterogeneity among studies on free β-hCG (I2 = 0%). A high level of between-study heterogeneity was detected among the studies reporting on PAPP-A (I2 = 90%), but was reduced after stratifying by geographic location, biomarker assay method, and timing of GDM diagnosis. Our meta-analysis indicates that women who are diagnosed with GDM have lower first trimester levels of both PAPP-A and free β-hCG than women who remain normoglycemic throughout pregnancy. Further assessment of the predictive capacity of these biomarkers within large, diverse populations is needed.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Permanent childhood hearing loss is one of the most common birth conditions associated with speech and language delay. A hearing screening can result in early detection and intervention for hearing loss. OBJECTIVES:To update and expand previous systematic reviews of economic evaluations of childhood hearing screening strategies, and explore the methodological differences. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane database, National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health's (CADTH) Grey matters. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS:Economic evaluations reporting costs and outcomes for both the intervention and comparator arms related to childhood hearing screening strategies. RESULTS:Thirty evaluations (from 29 articles) were included for review. Several methodological issues were identified, including: few evaluations reported outcomes in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs); none estimated utilities directly from surveying children; none included disutilities and costs associated with adverse events; few included costs and outcomes that differed by severity; few included long-term estimates; none considered acquired hearing loss; some did not present incremental results; and few conducted comprehensive univariate or probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Evaluations published post-2011 were more likely to report QALYs and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as outcome measures, include long-term treatment and productivity costs, and present incremental results. LIMITATIONS:We were unable to access the economic models and, although we employed an extensive search strategy, potentially not all relevant economic evaluations were identified. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:Most economic evaluations concluded that childhood hearing screening is value for money. However, there were significant methodological limitations with the evaluations.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) - a transitory form of diabetes induced by pregnancy - has potentially important short and long-term health consequences for both the mother and her baby. There is no globally agreed definition of GDM, but definition changes have increased the incidence in some countries in recent years, with some research suggesting minimal clinical improvement in outcomes. The aim of this qualitative systematic review was to identify the psychosocial experiences a diagnosis of GDM has on women during pregnancy and the postpartum period. METHODS:We searched CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for studies that provided qualitative data on the psychosocial experiences of a diagnosis of GDM on women across any stage of pregnancy and/or the postpartum period. We appraised the methodological quality of the included studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist for Qualitative Studies and used thematic analysis to synthesis the data. RESULTS:Of 840 studies identified, 41 studies of diverse populations met the selection criteria. The synthesis revealed eight key themes: initial psychological impact; communicating the diagnosis; knowledge of GDM; risk perception; management of GDM; burden of GDM; social support; and gaining control. The identified benefits of a GDM diagnosis were largely behavioural and included an opportunity to make healthy eating changes. The identified harms were emotional, financial and cultural. Women commented about the added responsibility (eating regimens, appointments), financial constraints (expensive food, medical bills) and conflicts with their cultural practices (alternative eating, lack of information about traditional food). Some women reported living in fear of risking the health of their baby and conducted extreme behaviours such as purging and starving themselves. CONCLUSION:A diagnosis of GDM has wide reaching consequences that are common to a diverse group of women. Threshold cut-offs for blood glucose levels have been determined using the risk of physiological harms to mother and baby. It may also be advantageous to consider the harms and benefits from a psychosocial and a physiological perspective. This may avoid unnecessary burden to an already vulnerable population.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2019, a new coronavirus emerged in China, and the disease caused by the virus (COVID-19) was rapidly classified as a pandemic. Pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are considered to be at risk for severe COVID-19. In the context of the pandemic, there are serious concerns regarding adverse effects on maternal and neonatal outcomes for women with GDM. Effective treatments for patients with GDM are therefore particularly important. Due to contact restrictions and infection risks, digital approaches such as telemedicine are suitable alternatives.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to summarize currently available evidence on maternal and offspring outcomes of pregnant women with GDM and COVID-19 and to examine telemedical interventions to improve maternal glycemic control during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsPublications were systematically identified by searching the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, and CINAHL databases for studies published up to March 2021. We sorted the COVID-19 studies by outcome and divided the telemedical intervention studies into web-based and app-based groups. We analyzed case reports (COVID-19) and both randomized and nonrandomized controlled clinical trials (telemedicine). To determine the change in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), we pooled appropriate studies and calculated the differences in means, with 95% CIs, for the intervention and control groups at the end of the interventions.ResultsRegarding COVID-19 studies, we identified 11 case reports, 3 letters, 1 case series, and 1 retrospective single-center study. In total, 41 patients with GDM and COVID-19 were analyzed. The maternal and neonatal outcomes were extremely heterogeneous. We identified adverse outcomes for mother and child through the interaction of GDM and COVID-19, such as cesarean deliveries and low Apgar scores. Furthermore, we selected 9 telemedicine-related articles: 6 were randomized controlled trials, 2 were clinical controlled trials, and 1 was a quasi-experimental design. In total, we analyzed 480 patients with GDM in the intervention groups and 494 in the control groups. Regarding the quality of the 9 telemedical studies, 4 were rated as strong, 4 as moderate, and 1 as weak. Telemedical interventions can contribute to favorable impacts on HbA1c and fasting blood glucose values in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Meta-analysis revealed a mean difference in HbA1c of -0.19% (95% CI 0.34% to 0.03%) for all telemedical interventions, -0.138% (95% CI -0.24% to -0.04%) for the web-based interventions, and -0.305% (96% CI -0.88% to 0.27%) for the app-based interventions.ConclusionsTelemedicine is an effective approach in the context of COVID-19 and GDM because it enables social distancing and represents optimal care of patients with GDM, especially with regard to glycemic control, which is very important in view of the identified adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Further research is needed.