Impact of the Gestational Diabetes Diagnostic Criteria during the Pandemic: An Observational Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To analyze the effect of applying alternative diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) during the COVID-19 pandemic on GDM prevalence and obstetrical and perinatal outcomes, in comparison to usual diagnostic approaches.Methods
Data from women referred to GDM diagnosis from 1 September to 30 November 2019 were retrospectively collected (2019-group). The same data from the same period in 2020 were prospectively collected (2020-group). In both cases, a two-step diagnostic approach was used, the first step being a screening test (1 h 50 goral glucose tolerance test, OGTT). In 2019 it was followed by a 100 gr OGTT for diagnosis. In 2020, this was replaced by a blood test for the measurement of plasma glucose and HbA1c, according to alternative GDM diagnostic criteria during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results
From 237 women in the 2019 group, 40 (16.9%) were diagnosed with GDM, while from 255 women in the 2020 group, 37 (14.5%) had GDM (p = 0.470). More women in the 2020 group, in comparison to the 2019 group, were nulligravid (41.9% vs. 47.2%, p = 0.013), had a personal history of GDM (11.4% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.013) and had macrosomia in previous pregnancies (10.2% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.001). Obstetrical and perinatal outcomes were similar when comparing women with GDM to non-GDM women in the 2019 and 2020 groups and between GDM women and non-GDM women.Conclusion
In a Spanish population, GDM prevalence during the COVID-19 pandemic using the alternative diagnostic criteria was similar to that found in 2019 using the usual diagnostic criteria. Despite women referred for GDM diagnosis during the pandemic having more GDM risk factors, obstetrical and perinatal outcomes were comparable to those observed before the pandemic.
SUBMITTER: Molina-Vega M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8585066 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe absence of universal gold standards for screening of gestational diabetes (GDM) has led to heterogeneity in the identification of GDM, thereby impacting the accurate estimation of the prevalence of GDM. We aimed to evaluate the effect of different diagnostic criteria for GDM on its prevalence among general populations of pregnant women worldwide, and also to investigate the prevalence of GDM based on various geographic regions.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus and Google-scholar databases for retrieving articles in English investigating the prevalence of GDM. All populations were classified to seven groups based-on their diagnostic criteria for GDM. Heterogeneous and non-heterogeneous results were analyzed using the fixed effect and random-effects inverse variance model for calculating the pooled effect. Publication bias was assessed by Begg's test. The Meta-prop method was used for the pooled estimation of the prevalence of GDM. Meta-regression was conducted to explore the association between prevalence of GDM and its diagnostic criteria. Modified Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for nonrandomized studies was used for quality assessment of the studies included; the ROBINS and the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias assessment tools were used to evaluate the risk of bias.ResultsWe used data from 51 population-based studies, i.e. a study population of 5,349,476 pregnant women. Worldwide, the pooled overall-prevalence of GDM, regardless of type of screening threshold categories was 4.4%, (95% CI 4.3-4.4%). The pooled overall prevalence of GDM in the diagnostic threshold used in IADPSG criteria was 10.6% (95% CI 10.5-10.6%), which was the highest pooled prevalence of GDM among studies included. Meta-regression showed that the prevalence of GDM among studies that used the IADPSG criteria was significantly higher (6-11 fold) than other subgroups. The highest and lowest prevalence of GDM, regardless of screening criteria were reported in East-Asia and Australia (Pooled-P = 11.4%, 95% CI 11.1-11.7%) and (Pooled-P = 3.6%, 95% CI 3.6-3.7%), respectively.ConclusionOver the past quarter century, the diagnosis of gestational diabetes has been changed several times; along with worldwide increasing trend of obesity and diabetes, reducing the threshold of GDM is associated with a significant increase in the incidence of GDM. The harm and benefit of reducing the threshold of diagnostic criteria on pregnancy outcomes, women's psychological aspects, and health costs should be evaluated precisely.
| S-EPMC6359830 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIMS/HYPOTHESIS:Detection and management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are crucial to reduce the risk of pregnancy-related complications for both mother and child. In 2013, the WHO adopted new diagnostic criteria for GDM to improve pregnancy outcomes. However, the evidence supporting these criteria is limited. Consequently, these new criteria have not yet been endorsed in the Netherlands. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of these criteria on the number of GDM diagnoses and pregnancy outcomes. METHODS:Data were available from 10,642 women who underwent a 75 g OGTT because of risk factors or signs suggestive of GDM. Women were treated if diagnosed with GDM according to the WHO 1999 criteria. Data on pregnancy outcomes were obtained from extensive chart reviews from 4,431 women and were compared between women with normal glucose tolerance (NGT) and women classified into the following groups: (1) GDM according to WHO 1999 criteria; (2) GDM according to WHO 2013 criteria; (3) GDM according to WHO 2013 fasting glucose threshold, but not WHO 1999 criteria; and (4) GDM according to WHO 1999 2 h plasma glucose threshold (2HG), but not WHO 2013 criteria. RESULTS:Applying the new WHO 2013 criteria would have increased the number of diagnoses by 45% (32% vs 22%) in this population of women at higher risk for GDM. In comparison with women with NGT, women classified as having GDM based only on the WHO 2013 threshold for fasting glucose, who were not treated for GDM, were more likely to have been obese (46.1% vs 28.1%, p < 0.001) and hypertensive (3.3% vs 1.2%, p < 0.001) before pregnancy, and to have had higher rates of gestational hypertension (7.8% vs 4.9%, p = 0.003), planned Caesarean section (10.3% vs 6.5%, p = 0.001) and induction of labour (34.8% vs 28.0%, p = 0.001). In addition, their neonates were more likely to have had an Apgar score <7 at 5 min (4.4% vs 2.6%, p = 0.015) and to have been admitted to the Neonatology Department (15.0% vs 11.1%, p = 0.004). The number of large for gestational age (LGA) neonates was not significantly different between the two groups. Women potentially missed owing to the higher 2HG threshold set by WHO 2013 had similar pregnancy outcomes to women with NGT. These women were all treated for GDM with diet and 20.5% received additional insulin. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION:Applying the WHO 2013 criteria will have a major impact on the number of GDM diagnoses. Using the fasting glucose threshold set by WHO 2013 identifies a group of women with an increased risk of adverse outcomes compared with women with NGT. We therefore support the use of a lower fasting glucose threshold in the Dutch national guideline for GDM diagnosis. However, adopting the WHO 2013 criteria with a higher 2HG threshold would exclude women in whom treatment for GDM seems to be effective.
| S-EPMC6449063 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the impact of different gestational-diabetes (GDM) diagnostic-criteria on the risk of adverse-maternal-outcomes. The search process encompassed PubMed (Medline), Scopus, and Web of Science databases to retrieve original, population-based studies with the universal GDM screening approach, published in English language and with a focus on adverse-maternal-outcomes up to January 2020. According to GDM diagnostic criteria, the studies were classified into seven groups. A total of 49 population-based studies consisting of 1409018 pregnant women with GDM and 7,667,546 non-GDM counterparts were selected for data analysis and knowledge synthesis. Accordingly, the risk of adverse-maternal-outcomes including primary-cesarean, induction of labor, maternal-hemorrhage, and pregnancy-related-hypertension, overall, regardless of GDM diagnostic-criteria and in all diagnostic-criteria subgroups were significantly higher than non-GDM counterparts. However, in meta-regression, the increased risk was not influenced by the GDM diagnostic-classification and the magnitude of the risks among patients, using the IADPSG criteria-classification as the most strict-criteria, was similar to other criteria. In conclusion, a reduction in the diagnostic-threshold increased the prevalence of GDM, but the risk of adverse-maternal-outcome was not different among those women who were diagnosed through more or less intensive strategies. Our review findings can empower health-care-providers to select the most cost-effective approach for the screening of GDM among pregnant women.
| S-EPMC7916110 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor more than half a century, there has been much research and controversies on how to accurately screen for and diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). There is a paucity of updated research among the Emirati population in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The lack of a uniform GDM diagnostic criteria results in the inability to accurately combine or compare the disease burden worldwide and locally. This study aimed to compare the incidence of GDM in the Emirati population using six diagnostic criteria for GDM.MethodsThe Mutaba'ah study is the largest multi-center mother and child cohort study in the UAE with an 18-year follow-up. We included singleton pregnancies from the Mutaba'ah cohort screened with the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at 24-32 weeks from May 2017 to March 2021. We excluded patients with known diabetes and with newly diagnosed diabetes. GDM cumulative incidence was determined using the six specified criteria. GDM risk factors were compared using chi-square and t-tests. Agreements among the six criteria were assessed using kappa statistics.ResultsA total of 2,546 women were included with a mean age of 30.5 ± 6.0 years. Mean gravidity was 3.5 ± 2.1, and mean body mass index (BMI) at booking was 27.7 ± 5.6 kg/m2. GDM incidence as diagnosed by any of the six criteria collectively was 27.1%. It ranged from 8.4% according to the EASD 1996 criteria to 21.5% according to the NICE 2015 criteria. The two most inclusive criteria were the NICE 2015 and the IADPSG criteria with GDM incidence rates of 21.5% (95% CI: 19.9, 23.1) and 21.3% (95% CI: 19.8, 23.0), respectively. Agreement between the two criteria was moderate (k = 0.66; p < 0.001). The least inclusive was the EASD 1996 criteria [8.4% (95% CI: 7.3, 9.6)]. The locally recommended IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria had weak to moderate agreement with the other criteria, with Cohen's kappa coefficient ranging from (k = 0.51; p < 0.001) to (k = 0.71; p < 0.001). Most of the GDM risk factors assessed were significantly higher among those with GDM (p < 0.005) identified by all criteria.ConclusionsThe findings indicate discrepancies among the diagnostic criteria in identifying GDM cases. This emphasizes the need to unify GDM diagnostic criteria in this population to provide accurate and reliable incidence estimates for healthcare planning, especially because the agreement with the recommended criteria was not optimal.
| S-EPMC9791114 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIMS:To compare risks of early postpartum diabetes and prediabetes in Chinese women with and without gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) during pregnancy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS:Tianjin GDM observational study included 1263 women with a history of GDM and 705 women without GDM who participated in the urban GDM universal screening survey by using World Health Organization's criteria. Postpartum diabetes and prediabetes were identified after a standard oral glucose tolerance test. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess risks of postpartum diabetes and prediabetes between women with and without GDM. RESULTS:During a mean follow-up of 3.53 years postpartum, 90 incident cases of diabetes and 599 incident cases of prediabetes were identified. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios among women with prior GDM, compared with those without it, were 76.1 (95% CI: 23.6-246) for diabetes and 25.4 (95% CI: 18.2-35.3) for prediabetes. When the mean follow-up extended to 4.40 years, 121 diabetes and 616 prediabetes cases were identified. Women with prior GDM had a 13.0-fold multivariable-adjusted risk (95% CI: 5.54-30.6) for diabetes and 2.15-fold risk (95% CI: 1.76-2.62) for prediabetes compared with women without GDM. The positive associations between GDM and the risks of postpartum diabetes and prediabetes were significant and persistent when stratified by younger and older than 30 years at delivery and normal weight and overweight participants. CONCLUSIONS:The present study indicated that women with prior GDM had significantly increased risks for postpartum diabetes and prediabetes, with the highest risk at the first 3-4 years after delivery, compared with those without GDM.
| S-EPMC6009844 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper seeks to summarize the impact of the one-step International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) versus the two-step gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) criteria with regard to prevalence, outcomes, healthcare delivery, and long-term maternal metabolic risk.Studies demonstrate a 1.03-3.78-fold rise in the prevalence of GDM with IADPSG criteria versus baseline criteria. Women with GDM by IADPSG criteria have more adverse pregnancy outcomes than women with normal glucose tolerance (NGT). Treatment of GDM by IADPSG criteria may be cost effective. Use of the fasting glucose as a screen before the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test to rule out GDM with fasting plasma glucose (FPG) < 4.4 (80 mg/dl) and rule in GDM with FPG ≥ 5.1 mmol/l (92 mg/dl) reduces the need for OGTT by 50% and its cost and inconvenience. The prevalence of postpartum abnormal glucose metabolism is higher for women with GDM diagnosed by IADPSG criteria versus that for women with NGT. Data support the use of IADPSG criteria, if the cost of diagnosis and treatment can be controlled and if lifestyle can be optimized to reduce the risk of future diabetes.
| S-EPMC5552830 | biostudies-other
Project description:During the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, people worldwide have experienced an unprecedented rise in psychological distress and anxiety. In addition to this challenging situation, the prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM), a hidden epidemic, has been steadily increasing in recent years. Lower-middle-income countries have faced significant barriers in providing accessible prenatal care and promoting a healthy diet for pregnant women, and the pandemic has made these challenges even more difficult to overcome. Pregnant women are at a higher risk of developing complications such as hyper-tension, preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes, all of which can have adverse implications for both maternal and fetal health. The occurrence of gestational diabetes has been on the rise, and it is possible that the pandemic has worsened its prevalence. Although data is limited, studies conducted in Italy and Canada suggest that the pandemic has had an impact on gestational diabetes rates, especially among women in their first trimester of pregnancy. The significant disruptions to daily routines caused by the pandemic, such as limited exercise options, indicate a possible link between COVID-19 and an increased likelihood of experiencing higher levels of weight gain during pregnancy. Notably, individuals in the United States with singleton pregnancies are at a significantly higher risk of excessive gestational weight gain, making this association particularly important to consider. Although comprehensive data is currently lacking, it is important for clinical researchers to explore the possibility of establishing correlations between the stress experienced during the pandemic, its consequences such as gestational gain weight, and the increasing incidence of gestational DM. This knowledge would contribute to better preventive measures and support for pregnant individuals during challenging times.
| S-EPMC10473953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo identify the incidence of postpartum glucose intolerance and develop a prediction model based on antenatal characteristics to predict postpartum glucose intolerance.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingGondar town public health facilities in Northwest Ethiopia.ParticipantsWomen who had gestational diabetes mellitus were advised to undergo postpartum oral glucose tolerance test at 6-12 weeks of delivery.Main outcomePostpartum glucose intolerance.Data analysisPredictors of postpartum glucose intolerance were identified using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The discriminative power of the predictor variables for postpartum glucose intolerance and the model accuracy were computed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and estimated by area under the curve (AUC) with 95% CI.ResultsA total of 112 (85.5%) women with gestational diabetes mellitus returned and completed the postpartum oral glucose tolerance test. The incidence of postpartum glucose intolerance was 21.4% (95% CI14.3 to 28.4), inclusive of 18.7% pre-diabetes and 2.7% diabetes. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that advanced maternal age, high fasting plasma glucose level at diagnosis, overweight and/or obesity, and antenatal depression were predictors of postpartum glucose intolerance. The AUC of the final reduced model to predict postpartum glucose intolerance was 0.884 (95% CI 0.822 to 0.937). Fasting plasma glucose at diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (AUC=0.736, 95% CI0.616 to 0.845) and overweight and/or obesity (AUC=0.718, 95% CI 0.614 to 0.814) were better predictors of postpartum glucose intolerance. Moreover, the AUC for the combined predictors of fasting plasma glucose at diagnosis and mid-upper arm circumference was 0.822 (95% CI 0.722 to 0.907), which was the best predictor.ConclusionsThe incidence of postpartum glucose intolerance was high among women with gestational diabetes mellitus. Antenatal predictors modestly predicted postpartum glucose intolerance. The findings suggest ongoing glucose screening is indicated for all women with gestational diabetes mellitus.
| S-EPMC7462231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimWe aimed to develop a prediction model for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes and to evaluate the performance of published prediction tools on our population.MethodsWe conducted a cohort study on nondiabetic women < 26 weeks gestation at a level 1 clinic in Johannesburg, South Africa. At recruitment, participants completed a questionnaire and random basal glucose and HbA1c were evaluated. A 75 g 2-hour OGTT was scheduled between 24-28 weeks gestation, as per FIGO guidelines. A score was derived using multivariate logistic regression. Published scoring systems were tested by deriving ROC curves.ResultsIn 554 women, RBG, BMI, and previous baby ≥ 4000 g were significant risk factors included for GDM, which were used to derive a nomogram-based score. The logistic regression model for prediction of GDM had R2 0.143, Somer's Dxy rank correlation 0.407, and Harrell's c-score 0.703. HbA1c did not improve predictive value of the nomogram at any threshold (e.g,. at probability > 10%, 25.6% of cases were detected without the HbA1c, and 25.8% of cases would have been detected with the HbA1c). The 9 published scoring systems performed poorly.ConclusionWe propose a nomogram-based score that can be used at first antenatal visit to identify women at high risk of GDM.
| S-EPMC5671730 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTwo criteria based on a 2 h 75 g OGTT are being used for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes (GDM), those recommended over the years by the World Health Organization (WHO), and those recently recommended by the International Association for Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG), the latter generated in the HAPO study and based on pregnancy outcomes. Our aim is to systematically review the evidence for the associations between GDM (according to these criteria) and adverse outcomes.MethodsWe searched relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane Library, CINHAL, WHO-Afro library, IMSEAR, EMCAT, IMEMR and WPRIM. We included cohort studies permitting the evaluation of GDM diagnosed by WHO and or IADPSG criteria against adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in untreated women. Only studies with universal application of a 75 g OGTT were included. Relative risks (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained for each study. We combined study results using a random-effects model. Inconsistency across studies was defined by an inconsistency index (I2) > 50%.ResultsData were extracted from eight studies, totaling 44,829 women. Greater risk of adverse outcomes was observed for both diagnostic criteria. When using the WHO criteria, consistent associations were seen for macrosomia (RR = 1.81; 95%CI 1.47-2.22; p < 0.001); large for gestational age (RR = 1.53; 95%CI 1.39-1.69; p < 0.001); perinatal mortality (RR = 1.55; 95% CI 0.88-2.73; p = 0.13); preeclampsia (RR = 1.69; 95%CI 1.31-2.18; p < 0.001); and cesarean delivery (RR = 1.37;95%CI 1.24-1.51; p < 0.001). Less data were available for the IADPSG criteria, and associations were inconsistent across studies (I2 ? 73%). Magnitudes of RRs and their 95%CIs were 1.73 (1.28-2.35; p = 0.001) for large for gestational age; 1.71 (1.38-2.13; p < 0.001) for preeclampsia; and 1.23 (1.01-1.51; p = 0.04) for cesarean delivery. Excluding either the HAPO or the EBDG studies minimally altered these associations, but the RRs seen for the IADPSG criteria were reduced after excluding HAPO.ConclusionsThe WHO and the IADPSG criteria for GDM identified women at a small increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Associations were of similar magnitude for both criteria. However, high inconsistency was seen for those with the IADPSG criteria. Full evaluation of the latter in settings other than HAPO requires additional studies.
| S-EPMC3352245 | biostudies-literature