Preventable health and cost burden of adverse birth outcomes associated with pregestational diabetes in the United States

Community-level social determinants of health and pregestational and gestational diabetes

BACKGROUND

Individual adverse social determinants of health are associated with increased risk of diabetes in pregnancy, but the relative influence of neighborhood or community-level social determinants of health is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether living in neighborhoods with greater socioeconomic disadvantage, food deserts, or less walkability was associated with having pregestational diabetes and developing gestational diabetes.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a secondary analysis of the prospective Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-To-Be. Home addresses in the first trimester were geocoded at the census tract level. The exposures (modeled separately) were the following 3 neighborhood-level measures of adverse social determinants of health: (1) socioeconomic disadvantage, defined by the Area Deprivation Index and measured in tertiles from the lowest tertile (ie, least disadvantage [T1]) to the highest (ie, most disadvantage [T3]); (2) food desert, defined by the United States Department of Agriculture Food Access Research Atlas (yes/no by low income and low access criteria); and (3) less walkability, defined by the Environmental Protection Agency National Walkability Index (most walkable score [15.26-20.0] vs less walkable score [<15.26]). Multinomial logistic regression was used to model the odds of gestational diabetes or pregestational diabetes relative to no diabetes as the reference, adjusted for age at delivery, chronic hypertension, Medicaid insurance status, and low household income (<130% of the US poverty level).

RESULTS

Among the 9155 assessed individuals, the mean Area Deprivation Index score was 39.0 (interquartile range, 19.0-71.0), 37.0% lived in a food desert, and 41.0% lived in a less walkable neighborhood. The frequency of pregestational and gestational diabetes diagnosis was 1.5% and 4.2%, respectively. Individuals living in a community in the highest tertile of socioeconomic disadvantage had increased odds of entering pregnancy with pregestational diabetes compared with those in the lowest tertile (T3 vs T1: 2.6% vs 0.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.41-4.48). Individuals living in a food desert (4.8% vs 4.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.77) and in a less walkable neighborhood (4.4% vs 3.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.71) had increased odds of gestational diabetes. There was no significant association between living in a food desert or a less walkable neighborhood and pregestational diabetes, or between socioeconomic disadvantage and gestational diabetes.

CONCLUSION

Nulliparous individuals living in a neighborhood with higher socioeconomic disadvantage were at increased odds of entering pregnancy with pregestational diabetes, and those living in a food desert or a less walkable neighborhood were at increased odds of developing gestational diabetes, after controlling for known covariates.

15. Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Association between glycemic control and group B streptococcus colonization among pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes

PROBLEM

Pregestational diabetes increases the risk of group B streptococcus (GBS) colonization in pregnancy. Whether glycemic control is associated with differences in this risk is unknown. We examined the association between glycemic control and GBS colonization among pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes.

METHOD OF STUDY

A retrospective cohort of pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes at a tertiary care center. The exposure was glycemic control, measured as hemoglobin A1c (A1c) at >20 weeks and assessed categorically at thresholds of <6.5% and <6.0%, and secondarily, as a continuous percentage. The outcome was maternal GBS colonization. Multivariable logistic regression was used and adjusted for age, parity, race, and ethnicity as a social determinant, body mass index, type of diabetes, and gestational age at A1c assessment.

RESULTS

Among 305 individuals (33% Type 1, 67% type 2), 45.0% (n = 140) were colonized with GBS. Individuals with an A1c < 6.5% were half as likely to be colonized with GBS compared with those with a A1c ≥ 6.5% (38.8% vs. 53.9%; adjusted odds ratio, AOR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.33-0.91). Results were unchanged at an A1c threshold of <6.0% (35.7% vs. 48.5%; AOR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.36-0.98). Individuals with a higher A1c as a continuous measure (%) were more likely to be colonized (AOR: 1.57 per 1%; 95% CI: 1.25-1.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes with worse glycemic control were at an increased risk of GBS colonization. Further study is needed to understand if improved glycemic control leads to lower risk of GBS colonization.

Determinants of Adverse Birth Outcomes in Public Hospitals of the Somali Region, Eastern Ethiopia: A Multicenter Unmatched Case-Control Study

Background

Pregnancy outcomes that differ from normal live births are known as adverse pregnancy outcomes. Adverse pregnancy outcomes also have significant effects on the infant's family and society. There is limited data on adverse outcomes in eastern Ethiopia, particularly in the Somali region.

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the determinants of adverse birth outcomes in the Somali Region Hospitals.

Design

A hospital-based unmatched case-control study was conducted to conduct this study.

Methods

A hospital-based unmatched case-control study was conducted between June and July 2021 in pregnant women who attended public hospitals in the Somali region. A total of 327 (109 cases and 218 controls) participants were included in this study. Women who gave birth with at least 1 adverse birth outcome were considered cases, and those who gave birth with normal birth outcomes were considered controls. Cases were recruited consecutively, and controls were selected using systematic sampling methods. Data was gathered using interviews, record reviews, using the pretested standard tools. The data were entered into EpiData version 3.1 and analyzed with SPSS version 22. Multivariable regression analysis with an adjusted odds ratio and a 95% confidence interval was used to identify the factors associated with adverse birth outcomes. Finally, P-values less than .05 were used to identify significantly associated predictors.

Results

In the current study, rural residency [AOR = 2.80; 95%CI:(1.61-4.87)] lack of ANC follow-up [AOR = 3.27; 95%CI: (1.77-6.02)], pregnancy-induced hypertension [AOR = 3.28; 95%CI: (1.74-6.17)] being anemic mothers [AOR = 3.51; 95%CI: (2.02-6.07)] and khat chewing [AOR = 4.54; 95%CI: (2.12-9.70)] were identified as determinants of adverse birth outcome.

Conclusions

In the current study, rural residency, lack of ANC, being anemic in indexed pregnancies, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and khat chewing were determinants of adverse birth outcomes. Therefore, efforts should be made to enhance ANC follow-up, iron and folic acid supplementation, early treatments of pregnancy-induced hypertension, and information on the risk of chewing khat.

Respecting tribal voices in the development of a gestational diabetes risk reduction preconception counseling program for American Indian/Alaska Native adolescent females: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/AN) are disproportionately affected by adolescent obesity, adolescent pregnancy and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). GDM is associated with increased risk for perinatal death, obesity, and subsequent type 2 diabetes (T2D) for the offspring. Moreover, mothers with GDM are also at increased risk for T2D post-partum. Yet few lifestyle interventions exist to reduce GDM risk prior to pregnancy. We describe the process of adapting an existing validated preconception counseling intervention for AI/AN adolescent girls at-risk for GDM and their mothers. Perspectives and recommendations were gathered from a diverse array of stakeholders to assure the new program called Stopping GDM was culturally responsive and developed with tribal voices and perspectives represented.

METHODS

We conducted focus groups and individual interviews with multiple AI/AN stakeholders (n = 55). Focus groups and interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a thematic content approach to construct cross-cutting themes across the focus groups and interviews.

RESULTS

Four key themes emerged reflecting issues important to planning a reproductive health intervention: 1) Limited awareness, knowledge, and health education resources about GDM; 2) The importance of acknowledging traditional AI/AN values and the diversity of traditions and culture among AI/AN tribes; 3) The need to cultivate healthy decision-making skills and empower girls to make safe and healthy choices; and 4) Lack of communication about reproductive health between AI/AN mothers and daughters and between AI/AN women and health care professionals.

CONCLUSION

Findings have been used to inform the cultural tailoring and adaptation of an existing preconception counseling program, originally designed for non-AI/AN adolescent girls with diabetes, for AI/AN adolescents at-risk for GDM in future pregnancies.

Continuous glucose monitor use in type 2 diabetes mellitus in pregnancy and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess whether continuous glucose monitor use in type 2 diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is associated with improved perinatal outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane library from inception through May 9, 2022.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included all studies that compared continuous glucose monitor use with fingerstick glucose monitoring in women with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

The initial search yielded 2463 unique citations that were screened in Covidence by 2 independent reviewers. Study types included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies. Our outcomes of interest were macrosomia or large-for-gestational-age infants, hemoglobin A1c, cesarean delivery, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy including preeclampsia, gestational age at delivery, and neonatal hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of estimates from 2 studies without risk of significant bias and reported summary adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Meta-analysis of 56 women with continuous glucose monitor use and 53 control women without continuous glucose monitor use showed that there was no difference in the incidence of large-for-gestational-age infants between continuous glucose monitor users and standard-of-care controls (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-1.78) with an I2 of 0%. In addition, there was no difference in the development of preeclampsia between continuous glucose monitor users and standard-of-care controls (odds ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-7.22) with an I2 of 0%.

CONCLUSION

Continuous glucose monitor use was not associated with improved perinatal outcomes as assessed by large-for-gestational-age infants and preeclampsia. This review is limited by the small amount of data available for this population, and further research is needed.

Associations Between Preconception Glycemia and Preterm Birth: The Potential Role of Health Care Access and Utilization

Background: Preconception diabetes is strongly associated with adverse birth outcomes. Less is known about the effects of elevated glycemia at levels below clinical cutoffs for diabetes. In this study, we estimated associations between preconception diabetes, prediabetes, and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) on the risk of preterm birth, and evaluated whether associations were modified by access to or utilization of health care services. Materials and Methods: We used data from Add Health, a US prospective cohort study with five study waves to date. At Wave IV (ages 24-32), glucose and HbA1c were measured. At Wave V (ages 32-42), women with a live birth reported whether the baby was born preterm. The analytic sample size was 1989. Results: The prevalence of preterm birth was 13%. Before pregnancy, 6.9% of women had diabetes, 23.7% had prediabetes, and 69.4% were normoglycemic. Compared to the normoglycemic group, women with diabetes had 2.1 (confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.5-2.9) times the risk of preterm birth, while women with prediabetes had 1.3 (95% CI: 1.0, 1.7) times the risk of preterm birth. There was a nonlinear relationship between HbA1c and preterm birth such that risk of preterm birth emerged after HbA1c = 5.7%, a standard cutoff for prediabetes. The excess risks of preterm birth associated with elevated HbA1c were four to five times larger among women who reported unstable health care coverage and among women who used the emergency room as usual source of care. Conclusion: Our findings replicate prior research showing strong associations between preconception diabetes and preterm birth, adding that prediabetes is also associated with higher risk. Policies and interventions to enhance access and utilization of health care among women before pregnancy should be examined.

Attendance at pre-pregnancy care clinics for women with type 1 diabetes: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 diabetes mellitus occurs in one in every 275 pregnancies and can result in increased morbidity and mortality for both mother and baby. Several pregnancy complications can be reduced or prevented by attendance at pre-pregnancy care (PPC). Despite this, less than 40% of pregnant women with pre-gestational diabetes receive formal PPC. The aim of this scoping review is to identify the barriers to PPC attendance among women with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review by searching five databases (Ebsco, Embase, Ovid and PubMed for literature and the ProQuest for any grey/unpublished literature) for studies in English between 2000 and 2022. Studies that evaluated attendance at PPC for women with type 1 diabetes were included.

RESULTS

There are multiple barriers to PPC attendance, and many of these barriers have been unchanged since the 1990s. Identified barriers can be grouped under patient-centered and clinician-centered headings. Patient factors include knowledge and awareness, unplanned pregnancies, negative perceptions of healthcare and communication issues, unclear attendance pathways and logistical issues including time off work and childcare. Clinician factors include physician knowledge, time constraints and lack of comfort discussing pregnancy/contraception.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the ongoing problem of poor attendance at PPC and identifies key barriers to be addressed when developing and implementing PPC programs for women with type 1 diabetes.

Association of community walkability and glycemic control among pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Neighborhood walkability is a community-level social determinant of health that measures whether people who live in a neighborhood walk as a mode of transportation. Whether neighborhood walkability is associated with glycemic control among pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes remains to be defined.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the association between community-level neighborhood walkability and glycemic control as measured by hemoglobin A1c (A1C) among pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective analysis of pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes enrolled in an integrated prenatal and diabetes care program from 2012 to 2016. Participant addresses were geocoded and linked at the census-tract level. The exposure was community walkability, defined by the US Environmental Protection Agency National Walkability Index (score range 1-20), which incorporates intersection density (design), proximity to transit stops (distance), and a mix of employment and household types (diversity). Individuals from neighborhoods that were the most walkable (score, 15.26-20.0) were compared with those from neighborhoods that were less walkable (score <15.26), as defined per national Environmental Protection Agency recommendations. The outcomes were glycemic control, including A1C <6.0% and <6.5%, measured both in early and late pregnancy, and mean change in A1C across pregnancy. Modified Poisson regression and linear regression were used, respectively, and adjusted for maternal age, body mass index at delivery, parity, race and ethnicity as a social determinant of health, insurance status, baseline A1C, gestational age at A1C measurement in early and late pregnancy, and diabetes type.

RESULTS

Among 417 pregnant individuals (33% type 1, 67% type 2 diabetes mellitus), 10% were living in the most walkable communities. All 417 individuals underwent A1C assessment in early pregnancy (median gestational age, 9.7 weeks; interquartile range, 7.4-14.1), and 376 underwent another A1C assessment in late pregnancy (median gestational age, 30.4 weeks; interquartile range, 27.8-33.6). Pregnant individuals living in the most walkable communities were more likely to have an A1C <6.0% in early pregnancy (15% vs 8%; adjusted relative risk, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-2.16), and an A1C <6.5% in late pregnancy compared with those living in less walkable communities (13% vs 9%; adjusted relative risk, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.63). For individuals living in the most walkable communities, the median A1C was 7.5 (interquartile range, 6.0-9.4) in early pregnancy and 5.9 (interquartile range, 5.4-6.4) in late pregnancy. For those living in less walkable communities, the median A1C was 7.3 (interquartile range, 6.2-9.2) in early pregnancy and 6.2 (interquartile range, 5.6-7.1) in late pregnancy. Change in A1C across pregnancy was not associated with walkability.

CONCLUSION

Pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes mellitus living in more walkable communities had better glycemic control in both early and late pregnancy. Whether community-level interventions to enhance neighborhood walkability can improve glycemic control in pregnancy requires further study.

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

15. Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Cesarean delivery rates and indications in pregnancies complicated by diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Rates of pregestational (PGDM) and gestational diabetes (GDM), and their associated pregnancy complications, are rising. Pregnancies complicated by diabetes have increased cesarean delivery (CD) rates; however, there are limited data regarding the current rates of, and contributing factors to, these deliveries. The Robson Ten Group Classification System (TGCS) is a clinically relevant, standardized framework that can be used to evaluate and analyze cesarean rates. The objective of this study was to evaluate rates of, and indications for, intrapartum, unplanned CD among pregnancies complicated by diabetes, compared to normoglycemic (NG) pregnancies, in a large United States birth cohort.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used chart-abstracted data on births between 24 and 42 weeks' gestation at 17 hospitals that contributed to the Obstetrical Care Outcome Assessment Program database between 01/2016 and 03/2019. The CD rate for NG pregnancies, and pregnancies complicated by gestational and PGDM was calculated and compared using the Robson TGCS. The indications for intrapartum CD in patients with term, singleton, vertex gestations without a prior cesarean were then analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to compare the cesarean rate and indications for CD, between the diabetic groups and the NG group. Results were adjusted for maternal age, BMI, neonatal birth weight, and insurance status, as well as clustering by hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 86,381 pregnant people were included in the study cohort. Of these 76,272 (88.3%) were NG, 8591 (9.9%) had GDM, and 1518 (1.8%) had PGDM. Compared to NG patients, overall cesarean rates were higher in patients with GDM (40.3% vs. 29.7%; aOR 1.25, 95%CI 1.18-1.31) and PGDM (60.0% vs. 29.7%; aOR 2.53, 95%CI 2.04-3.13). This finding remained true when the cohort was restricted to term, singleton, vertex laboring patients without a prior cesarean; compared to NG patients, the cesarean rate was higher in patients with GDM (17.4% vs. 12.2%, aOR 1.37, 95%CI 1.29-1.45) and PGDM (26.0% vs. 12.2%, aOR 2.55, 95%CI 2.00-3.25). The cesarean rate for fetal indications was similar in the GDM (5.7%) and NG (4.4%) groups, while those patients with PGDM had a significantly higher rate (10.4%; aOR 2.01, 95%CI 1.43-2.83). Similarly, the rate of cesarean for labor dystocia in patients with PGDM was significantly higher than in NG patients (16.9% vs. 7.0%, and aOR 2.28, 95%CI 1.66-3.13) while patients with GDM had an intermediate rate (10.6% vs. 7.0%, aOR 1.49, 95%CI 1.40-1.57).

CONCLUSIONS

The CD rate is significantly higher in pregnancies complicated by diabetes, particularly pregestational, compared to NG pregnancies. Despite controlling for maternal factors and birth weight, pregnancies complicated by diabetes are more likely to undergo an unplanned intrapartum cesarean secondary to labor dystocia than their NG counterparts, but only pregnancies complicated by PGDM have an increased risk of cesarean for fetal indications. More research is needed to understand whether this higher cesarean rate is due to factors intrinsic to diabetes in laboring patients or is due to a difference in the way clinicians manage diabetics in labor.

Pregnancy, delivery and neonatal outcomes among women with diabetic retinopathy

OBJECTIVES

Diabetic retinopathy is a common microvascular complication of diabetes. Despite that, there are few studies in the literature to address pregnancy, delivery, or neonatal outcomes among women with diabetic retinopathy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study using the Health Care Cost and Utilization Project-Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database over 11 years from 2004 to 2014. A delivery cohort was created using ICD-9 codes. ICD-9 code 250 or 249 was used to extract the cases of maternal diabetic retinopathy. A multivariant logistic regression model was used to adjust for statistically significant variables (p-value ≤ .05).

RESULTS

There were a total of 9,096,788 deliveries during the study period. Of those, 86 615 pregnant women were found to have Diabetes Mellites (DM). Diabetic retinopathy was present in 1233 of the patients with DM. Diabetic retinopathy increased the likelihood of developing pregnancy-induced HTN (p < .0001), Preeclampsia (p < .0001), and Preeclampsia and eclampsia superimposed on preexisting HTN (p < .0001). In addition, in women with DM, the presence of diabetic retinopathy increased the risk of Preterm delivery (p = .002), cesarean section (p < .0001), requiring transfusion (p < .0001), and undergoing hysterectomy (p = .001), and were less likely to have a spontaneous vaginal delivery (p < .0001). However, the presence of diabetic retinopathy in women with DM did not increase the risk of the fetus being small at delivery, having intrauterine fetal demise, or congenital anomalies.

CONCLUSION

Women with diabetic retinopathy should be counseled about their increased risk of pregnancy-induced HTN, preeclampsia, premature delivery, cesarean section, transfusion, and hysterectomy.

Screening test characteristics and comparison of diabetes outcomes among pregnant patients with prediabetes

This study sought to compare test characteristics of hemoglobin A1c, oral glucose tolerance test and fasting plasma glucose for the development of gestational diabetes among women with prediabetes. Diabetes outcomes were compared by screening test used for prediabetes diagnosis among a retrospective cohort of pregnant patients between 2017-2021. During the study, 8132 patients received diabetes screening and 14.0% met criteria for prediabetes. By screening test, 75.1% were screened with hemoglobin A1c, 10.0% with fasting plasma glucose and 14.9% with a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test. Hemoglobin A1c had the highest positive predictive value (67.2%). Use of hemoglobin A1c was significantly more likely to identify women with GDM than oral glucose tolerance test (aOR 3.94, 95% CI 2.30-6.73). In this study cohort, hemoglobin A1c was able to identify patients that were more likely to develop GDM in an at-risk population.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Prediabetes is becoming more common in the general population; however little is known about prediabetes in pregnancy. Women with prediabetes in pregnancy appear to be at increased risk of developing gestational diabetes mellitus, however there is minimal information about various screening tests performance in pregnancy for detection of prediabetes and subsequent gestational diabetes.What do the results of this study add? The results of this study compare three commonly used screening tests for screening for diabetes. When identifying women with prediabetes, they are at increased risk for developing gestational diabetes mellitus if identified by hemoglobin A1c.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The clinical implication of this study is that women can be screened with hemoglobin A1c in early pregnancy for both overt diabetes, but also may be identified as high risk with prediabetes. Among women with prediabetes by hemoglobin A1c, they remain at high risk for developing gestational diabetes mellitus.

Future Offspring Costs in Economic Evaluation

Economic evaluation guidelines increasingly prescribe inclusion of all future costs. We point at an important dimension of future costs that is systematically neglected. Healthcare can affect future offspring, either through affecting the patient's fertility or through determining future offspring's health. As we show, the future costs associated with these changes can be substantial and will vary across interventions and demographic groups. However, systematic inclusion of these future offspring costs would raise many problems on its own. Based on the population ethics concept of necessitarianism, we suggest that only those future costs that spring from 'necessary' future lives should be included in future cost calculations, while all costs associated with 'potential' future lives can be ignored. This approach allows excluding most future offspring costs and avoids skewed cost-effectiveness outcomes of interventions with fertility effects, while taking into account the economic implications of preventing disease in future generations that will exist by necessity. Overall, future generations expose a substantial gap in today's Health Technology Assessment (HTA) methodology and further discussion of the issues they raise is needed.

15. Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Pregnancy and contraception in women with Pre-Gestational diabetes in secondary Care- A questionnaire study

AIMS

To establish the knowledge of women with pre-gestational diabetes about of the risks of diabetes in pregnancy, and investigate their pregnancy plans, contraceptive choices, and preparedness for pregnancy.

METHODS

Women of reproductive age attending diabetes clinics across a single busy metropolitan NHS Trust were invited to fill in a questionnaire about pregnancy and contraception. The electronic health records of those women were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Ninety-six women completed the questionnaire. The majority of respondents (94%) had Type 1 Diabetes. Only 3% of women met the criteria of 'prepared for pregnancy'. Low efficacy contraception was used by 32% of women. Most women were only aware of a few risks to the mother and fetus in pregnancy, though the majority of women were aware of the importance of good glycaemic control before pregnancy. Previous pregnancies, or attendance at pre-conception counselling, did not improve participant knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Many women with diabetes of reproductive age are poorly prepared for pregnancy, but many are also using less effective contraceptive methods. These areas should be addressed if the poor pregnancy outcome in women with diabetes are to be improved, possibly through the development of an evidenced-based structured education course to target pre-conception and contraception.

Perceptions and Practice of Preconception Care by Healthcare Workers and High-Risk Women in South Africa: A Qualitative Study

Preconception care is biomedical, behavioural, and social health interventions provided to women and couples before conception. This service is sometimes prioritised for women at high risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Evidence revealed that only very few women in Africa with severe chronic conditions receive or seek preconception care advice and assessment for future pregnancy. Thus, this study aimed to explore the perceptions and practice of preconception care by healthcare workers and high-risk women in Kwa-Zulu-Natal, South Africa. This exploratory, descriptive qualitative study utilised individual in-depth interviews to collect data from 24 women at high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes and five healthcare workers. Thematic analysis was conducted using Nvivo version 12. Five main themes that emerged from the study include participants’ views, patients’ access to information, practices, and perceived benefits of preconception care. The healthcare workers were well acquainted with the preconception care concept, but the women had inconsistent acquaintance. Both groups acknowledge the role preconception care can play in the reduction of maternal and child mortality. A recommendation is made for the healthcare workers to use the ‘One key’ reproductive life plan question as an entry point for the provision of preconception care.

Congenital Malformation Risk According to Hemoglobin A1c Values in a Contemporary Cohort with Pregestational Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to evaluate the association between hemoglobin A1c values and likelihood of fetal anomalies in women with pregestational diabetes.

STUDY DESIGN

Women with pregestational diabetes who delivered at a single institution that serves a nonreferred population from May 1, 2009 to December 31, 2018 were ascertained. Hemoglobin A1c values were obtained at the first prenatal visit. Women who delivered a singleton live- or stillborn infant with a major malformation as defined by European Surveillance of Congenital Anomalies criteria were identified. In infants with multiple system anomalies, each malformation was considered separately. Hemoglobin A1c values were analyzed categorically by using Mantel-Haenszel method and continuously with linear regression for trend for fetal anomalies.

RESULTS

A total of 1,676 deliveries to women with pregestational diabetes were delivered at our institution, and hemoglobin A1c was assessed in 1,573 deliveries (94%). There were 129 deliveries of an infant with at least one major malformation, an overall anomaly rate of approximately 8%. Mean hemoglobin A1c concentration was significantly higher in pregnancies with anomalous infants, 9.3 ± 2.1% versus 8.0 ± 2.1%, and p <0.001. There was no difference in gestational age at the time hemoglobin A1c was obtained, 13 ± 8.3 versus 14 ± 8.7 weeks. Hemoglobin A1c was associated with increased probability of a congenital malformation. This reached 10% with a hemoglobin A1c concentration of 10%, and 20% with a hemoglobin A1c of 13%. Similar trends were seen when examining risk of anomalies by organ system with increasing hemoglobin A1c levels, with the greatest increase in probability for both cardiac and genitourinary anomalies.

CONCLUSION

In women with pregestational diabetes, hemoglobin A1c is strongly associated with fetal anomaly risk. Data from a contemporary cohort may facilitate counseling and also highlight the need for preconceptual care and glycemic optimization prior to entry to obstetric care.

KEY POINTS

· Infants of diabetic mothers had an 8% major anomaly rate.. · HbA1c of 10% in pregnancy associated with 10% anomaly rate.. · HbA1c of 13% in pregnancy associated with 20% anomaly rate.. · Preconceptual care is important to reduce prevalence..

Explaining the Black-White Disparity in Preterm Birth: A Consensus Statement From a Multi-Disciplinary Scientific Work Group Convened by the March of Dimes

In 2017–2019, the March of Dimes convened a workgroup with biomedical, clinical, and epidemiologic expertise to review knowledge of the causes of the persistent Black-White disparity in preterm birth (PTB). Multiple databases were searched to identify hypothesized causes examined in peer-reviewed literature, 33 hypothesized causes were reviewed for whether they plausibly affect PTB and either occur more/less frequently and/or have a larger/smaller effect size among Black women vs. White women. While definitive proof is lacking for most potential causes, most are biologically plausible. No single downstream or midstream factor explains the disparity or its social patterning, however, many likely play limited roles, e.g., while genetic factors likely contribute to PTB, they explain at most a small fraction of the disparity. Research links most hypothesized midstream causes, including socioeconomic factors and stress, with the disparity through their influence on the hypothesized downstream factors. Socioeconomic factors alone cannot explain the disparity's social patterning. Chronic stress could affect PTB through neuroendocrine and immune mechanisms leading to inflammation and immune dysfunction, stress could alter a woman's microbiota, immune response to infection, chronic disease risks, and behaviors, and trigger epigenetic changes influencing PTB risk. As an upstream factor, racism in multiple forms has repeatedly been linked with the plausible midstream/downstream factors, including socioeconomic disadvantage, stress, and toxic exposures. Racism is the only factor identified that directly or indirectly could explain the racial disparities in the plausible midstream/downstream causes and the observed social patterning. Historical and contemporary systemic racism can explain the racial disparities in socioeconomic opportunities that differentially expose African Americans to lifelong financial stress and associated health-harming conditions. Segregation places Black women in stressful surroundings and exposes them to environmental hazards. Race-based discriminatory treatment is a pervasive stressor for Black women of all socioeconomic levels, considering both incidents and the constant vigilance needed to prepare oneself for potential incidents. Racism is a highly plausible, major upstream contributor to the Black-White disparity in PTB through multiple pathways and biological mechanisms. While much is unknown, existing knowledge and core values (equity, justice) support addressing racism in efforts to eliminate the racial disparity in PTB.

Type 2 diabetes and neonatal hypoglycemia: role of route of delivery and insulin infusion

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rate of neonatal hypoglycemia among newborns delivered by individuals with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in two clinical scenarios: who attempted vaginal delivery vs. had a planned cesarean delivery (CD); who had intrapartum insulin infusion vs. who did not.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of individuals with insulin-treated T2DM who had non-anomalous singleton pregnancy and delivered at a single tertiary center (March 2012 and May 2018). Individuals with chronic renal failure, proliferative retinopathy, or major congenital anomalies were excluded. The primary outcome was neonatal hypoglycemia (blood glucose < 40 mg/dl <24 h of age or < 50 mg/dl >24 h of age). Secondary outcomes included neonatal outcomes. Multivariable Poisson regression models with robust error variance were used to examine the association between groups and the primary outcome. Adjusted relative risk (aRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 233 individuals with T2DM, 215 (92.2%) met the inclusion criteria, of whom 95 (44%) attempted vaginal delivery and 120 (56%) had a planned CD. Individuals who labored had a higher gestational age at delivery (36.6 vs. 35.8 weeks, p = .005), and higher blood glucose levels upon admission (125 vs 103, p < .001) compared to those with a planned CD. After adjustment for potential confounders, there was no difference in risk of neonatal hypoglycemia between the groups (41.2 vs 44.1%, aRR 1.05, 95% CI = 0.75-1.45). Among those who attempted vaginal delivery, 34 (35.8%) required insulin infusion. There was no difference in the risk of neonatal hypoglycemia (aRR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.45-1.37) between newborns delivered by individuals who required insulin infusion and those who did not.

CONCLUSION

Over 40% of newborns delivered by individuals with insulin-dependent T2DM had hypoglycemia; however, there was no significant difference in the risk of hypoglycemia, irrespective of the route of delivery and the use of insulin infusion.

Detemir vs neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin for diabetes mellitus in pregnancy: a comparative effectiveness, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Insulin detemir, being used increasingly during pregnancy, may have pharmacologic benefits compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the probability that compared with treatment with neutral protamine Hagedorn, treatment with insulin detemir reduces the risk for adverse neonatal outcome among individuals with type 2 or overt type 2 diabetes mellitus (gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosed at <20 weeks' gestation).

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a multiclinic randomized controlled trial (September 2018 to January 2020), which included women with singleton gestation with type 2 or overt type 2 diabetes mellitus who sought obstetrical care at ≤21 weeks' gestation. Participants were randomized to receive either insulin detemir or neutral protamine Hagedorn by a clinic-stratified scheme. The primary outcome was a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes, including shoulder dystocia, large for gestational age, neonatal intensive care unit admission, respiratory distress (defined as the need of at least 4 hours of respiratory support with supplemental oxygen, continuous positive airway pressure or ventilation at the first 24 hours of life), or hypoglycemia. The secondary neonatal outcomes included gestational age at delivery, small for gestational age, 5-minute Apgar score of <7, lowest glucose level, need for intravenous glucose, respiratory distress syndrome, need for mechanical ventilation or continuous positive airway pressure, neonatal jaundice requiring therapy, brachial plexus injury, and hospital length of stay. The secondary maternal outcomes included hypoglycemic events, hospital admission for glucose control, hypertensive disorder of pregnancy, maternal weight gain, cesarean delivery, and postpartum complications. We used the Bayesian statistics to estimate a sample size of 108 to have >75% probability of any reduction in the primary outcome, assuming 80% power and a hypothesized effect of 33% reduction with insulin detemir. All analyses were intent to treat under a Bayesian framework with neutral priors (a priori assumed a 50:50 likelihood of either intervention being better; National Clinical Trial identifier 03620890).

RESULTS

There were 108 women randomized in this trial (57 in insulin detemir and 51 in neutral protamine Hagedorn), and 103 women were available for analysis of the primary outcome (n=5 for pregnancy loss before 24 weeks' gestation). Bayesian analysis indicated an 87% posterior probability of reduced primary outcome with insulin detemir compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn (posterior adjusted relative risk, 0.88; 95% credible interval, 0.61-1.12). Bayesian analyses for secondary outcomes showed consistent findings of lower adverse maternal outcomes with the use of insulin detemir vs neutral protamine Hagedorn: for example, maternal hypoglycemic events (97% probability of benefit; posterior adjusted relative risk, 0.59; 95% credible interval, 0.29-1.08) and hypertensive disorders (88% probability of benefit; posterior adjusted relative risk, 0.81; 95% credible interval, 0.54-1.16).

CONCLUSION

In our comparative effectiveness trial involving individuals with type 2 or overt type 2 diabetes mellitus, use of insulin detemir resulted in lower rates of adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn.

Interventions to Support International Migrant Women's Reproductive Health in Western-Receiving Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: The reproductive health outcomes of international migrant women differ in comparison with receiving-country-born women, depending on country of birth and immigrant status. Effective interventions to support the reproductive health of international migrant women are not well known.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies between 2010 and 2017 evaluating interventions directly or indirectly affecting the reproductive health (as defined by the World Health Organization) of international migrant women in Western-receiving countries.

Results: Sixteen studies representing 5080 migrants were identified. Interventions consisted of linguistically (e.g., translated brochures) or culturally adapted (e.g., cultural narratives) routine care or new interventions. Meta-analysis showed that interventions increased rates of preventive reproductive health activities, including mammography, condom use, and Pap test completion, by almost 18% (95% confidence interval 7.61–28.3) compared with usual care or interventions not adapted to migrant women.

Conclusion: Culturally and linguistically adapted care practices congruent with target populations of international migrant women are effective in improving their reproductive health outcomes, particularly their participation in preventative reproductive health activities.

Periconception glycemic control and congenital anomalies in women with pregestational diabetes

INTRODUCTION

To assess the relationship between periconception glycemic control and congenital anomalies in a contemporary, diverse population of women with pregestational diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of all pregnant women with pregestational diabetes at a single institution (2003-2017) in the USA. The primary outcome was frequency of major or minor congenital anomalies. Glycemic control was assessed by periconception glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). The association of periconception HbA1c with pregnancy outcomes was assessed using bivariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

Our sample included 351 women, of which 63.8% had type 2 diabetes. Our study cohort is racially and ethnically diverse, with approximately equal numbers of women identifying as white non-Hispanic, black non-Hispanic and Hispanic, with 3.4% identifying as Asian. Of these 351 women, 52 (14.8%) had a fetus with a congenital anomaly, of whom the majority (n=43) had a major anomaly. Over half (51.1%) of all major anomalies were cardiovascular. Compared with the group with the best glycemic control (HbA1c ≤7.4%), which had an anomaly frequency of 10.2%, the frequency of congenital anomalies increased significantly with each category of worsening glycemic control (HbA1c 7.5%-9.4%: 20.6%, adjusted OR (aOR) 2.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 5.13; HbA1c 9.5% to 11.4%: 25.8%, aOR 2.86, 95% CI 1.08 to 7.59; HbA1c ≥11.5%: 37.5%, aOR 7.66, 95% CI 2.27 to 25.9).

CONCLUSION

In a diverse cohort of women with pregestational diabetes, higher periconception HbA1c, especially HbA1c >9.5, was significantly associated with major congenital fetal anomalies. Our study sample is reflective of the current population of pregnant women with diabetes, including women with type 2 diabetes and from racial and ethnic minorities.

Redesigned Care Delivery for Insulin-Requiring Diabetes in Pregnancy Improves Perinatal Glycemic Control While Reducing Neonatal Intensive Care Admissions, Length of Stay, and Costs

Objective: We sought to improve perinatal glycemic control and downstream neonatal outcomes through redesigned ambulatory management for women with insulin-requiring diabetes in pregnancy. Methods: To address gaps in perinatal glycemic management of women with insulin-requiring diabetes in pregnancy, redesigned care delivery (RCD) utilized integrated practice unit and minimally disruptive medicine concepts with incorporation of cellular-enabled glucose monitoring. Primary outcomes of RCD (N = 129) included hemoglobin A1c ([HbA1c], within RCD cohort), and gestational age (GA) at delivery, neonatal intensive care (NICU) admission, and NICU length of stay (LOS) compared with a preredesign care cohort (Pre-RCD; N = 122). Secondary outcomes included facility, payer reimbursement, and program costs. Generalized linear models assessed continuous variables while logistic regression methods assessed categorical outcomes. Results: Utilizing RCD, 92% of women with an initial HbA1c <6.5% maintained glycemic control until delivery, and 67.2% with an initial HbA1c ≥6.5% achieved delivery levels <6.5%. NICU admissions and GA-adjusted LOS decreased significantly [Pre-RCD vs. RCD: NICU admissions, 41.0% vs. 27.3%, p < 0.024; NICU LOS (95% confidence interval [CI]), 21.9 (17.1-26.6) vs. 14.6 (9.1-20.1), p = 0.045]. Every 10 days of redesigned management decreased mean NICU LOS by 1 day. Mean payer neonatal reimbursements decreased over $18,000 per delivery (p = 0.08) compared with implementation costs of $1,942 per delivery. Conclusion: Redesigned perinatal diabetes care with remote glucose monitoring demonstrated improved outcomes and value through downstream neonatal outcomes and lower payer costs. Therefore, subsequent dissemination and sustainability of similar programs' improved outcomes will likely require payer support.

Preterm birth lifetime costs in the United States in 2016: An update

The societal cost of preterm birth indicates potential economic gains from interventions that reduce the incidence of preterm birth. Changes in the epidemiology of preterm birth and healthcare costs require periodic updates to cost estimates. Previously reported incremental cost estimates for the United States in 2004 were updated. The discounted present value of the excess cost associated with prematurity for the 2016 US birth cohort was estimated to be $25.2 billion: $17.1 billion for medical care of persons born preterm, $2.0 billion for delivery care, $1.3 billion for early intervention and special education, and $4.8 billion in lost productivity due to associated disabilities in adults. The nominal and inflation-adjusted incremental costs per preterm birth increased by 26% and 4%, respectively, during 2004-2016. The aggregate cost decreased by 4%, associated with declines in overall births and the preterm birth rate and changes in the distribution by gestational age.

Type 1 Diabetes: Management in Women From Preconception to Postpartum

CONTEXT

This review presents an up-to-date summary on management of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) among women of reproductive age and covers the following time periods: preconception, gestation, and postpartum.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic search and review of the literature for randomized controlled trials and other studies evaluating management of T1DM before pregnancy, during pregnancy, and postpartum was performed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Preconception planning should begin early in the reproductive years for young women with T1DM. Preconception and during pregnancy, it is recommended to have near-normal glucose values to prevent adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, including fetal demise, congenital anomaly, pre-eclampsia, macrosomia, neonatal respiratory distress, neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, and neonatal hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

Women with T1DM can have healthy, safe pregnancies with preconception planning, optimal glycemic control, and multidisciplinary care.

14. Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Optimizing Care Preconception for Women With Diabetes and Obesity

The prevalence of diabetes in reproductive age women has been reported to be as high as 6.8%, with pregestational diabetes affecting 2% of all pregnancies. As cases of diabetes in children and adolescents rise, more patients will be entering reproductive age and pregnancy with diagnoses of obesity, prediabetes, type 2 diabetes. Early interventions of diet modification and exercise to maintain healthy weights can delay or even prevent these complications. It is critical for health care providers to emphasize the importance of preconception counseling in this high-risk patient population to reduce the morbidities associated with obesity and diabetes in pregnancy.

J. N, P. Y. L, N. H. Factors influencing pregnancy planning of multi-ethnic Asian women with diabetes: A qualitative study

Introduction

Pregnancy planning varies among women with diabetes. Observing that the literature examining the factors affecting diabetic women’s pregnancy intentions in multi-ethnic Asian populations is limited, we sought to explore these factors to give a better perspective on these women’s pregnancy planning.

Methods

This qualitative study used individual in-depth interviews to capture the views and experiences of non-pregnant diabetic women of reproductive age in four public health clinics in a southwestern state of peninsular Malaysia from May 2016 to February 2017. The participants were purposively sampled according to ethnicity and were interviewed using a semi-structured topic guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, and transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

From the 33 interviews that were analysed, four important factors influencing participants’ decisions regarding pregnancy planning were identified. Participants’ perception of poor pregnancy outcomes due to advanced age and medical condition was found to have an impact. However, despite these fears and negative relationships with doctors, personal, family and cultural influences supported by religious ‘up to God’ beliefs took centre stage in the pregnancy intention of some participants. Participants demonstrated a variety of understandings of pregnancy planning. They outlined some activities for pregnancy preparation, although many also reported limited engagement with pre-pregnancy care.

Conclusions

This study emphasised the known dilemma experienced by diabetic women considering their desire for an ideal family structure against their perceived pregnancy risks, heterogeneous religious beliefs and the impact of cultural demands on pregnancy intention. This study urges healthcare providers to increase their engagement with the women in pregnancy planning in a more personalised approach.

ADIPS 2020 guideline for pre-existing diabetes and pregnancy

This is the full version of the Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS) 2020 guideline for pre-existing diabetes and pregnancy. The guideline encompasses the management of women with pre-existing type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes in relation to pregnancy, including preconception, antepartum, intrapartum and postpartum care. The management of women with monogenic diabetes or cystic fibrosis-related diabetes in relation to pregnancy is also discussed.

Fetal Anomaly Detection in Pregnancies With Pregestational Diabetes

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate fetal anomaly detection in pregnancies with pregestational diabetes, according to the gestational age at the time of specialized sonography, use of follow-up sonography, maternal body mass index, and organ system(s) involved.

METHODS

Women with pregestational diabetes who received prenatal care and delivered a live-born or stillborn neonate at our hospital from October 2011 through April 2017 were ascertained. We included all pregnancies with at least 1 confirmed structural anomaly (EUROCAT classification) who had detailed sonography at 18 weeks' gestation or later. We analyzed detection of anomalous fetuses at the initial detailed sonogram and, if no abnormality was identified, during any follow-up sonograms. Statistical analyses were performed with the χ² test and Mantel-Haenszel χ² test for trend.

RESULTS

Seventy-two anomalous neonates (72 of 1060 [6.8%]) were born. Overall detection was 55 of 72 (76%); 49 of 72 (68%) were detected at the initial detailed sonogram, compared to 6 of 15 (40%) of follow-up examinations (P = .04). Recognition at the initial or follow-up examination was not dependent on gestational age or body mass index category (all P > .05). Of individual organ system anomalies, 67 of 89 (75%) were identified. Detection exceeded 85% for central nervous system, genitourinary, and musculoskeletal abnormalities and 43% for craniofacial anomalies. Sixty-five percent of cardiac anomalies were detected, and 14 of 17 (82%) requiring specialized care in the immediate neonatal period were recognized.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately three-fourths of anomalous fetuses were identified, with greater detection at the initial detailed examination. Fetuses with central nervous system, genitourinary, musculoskeletal abnormalities and those with cardiac anomalies requiring specialized cardiac care were more likely to come to attention.

Systematic review of economic evaluation studies on preconception care interventions

Implementation of preconception care interventions have been encouraged for improving maternal and child health outcomes; therefore, evidence on their cost-effectiveness is needed. We conducted the systematic review to examine the efficiency of those interventions by collecting evidence from published economic evaluation studies. Out of 14 included studies, almost all (12/14) were in high-income countries. All studies were not cost-utility analysis with genetic disease screening and diabetes management were the common interventions for evaluating their efficiency during preconception period. Preconception care interventions are likely to be cost-effective, especially in low-income countries which incremental benefits had a greater return than developed nations.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of pre-pregnancy care for women with diabetes for improving maternal and perinatal outcomes

Background

Pre-gestational diabetes mellitus is associated with increased risk of maternal and perinatal adverse outcomes. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of pre-conception care (PCC) in improving maternal and perinatal outcomes.

Methods

Databases from MEDLINE, EMBASE, WEB OF SCIENCE, and Cochrane Library were searched, including the CENTRAL register of controlled trials, and CINHAL up until March 2019, without any language restrictions, for any pre-pregnancy care aiming at health promotion, glycemic control, and screening and treatment of diabetes complications in women with type I or type II pre-gestational diabetes. Trials and observational studies were included in the review. Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Cochrane collaboration methodology for data synthesis and analysis were used, along with the GRADE tool to evaluate the body of evidence.

Results

The search identified 8500 potentially relevant citations of which 40 reports of 36 studies were included. The meta-analysis results show that PCC reduced congenital malformations risk by 71%, (Risk ratio (RR) 0.29; 95% CI: 0.21–0.40, 25 studies; 5903 women; high-certainty evidence). The results also show that PCC may lower HbA1c in the first trimester of pregnancy by an average of 1.27% (Mean difference (MD) 1.27; 95% CI: 1.33–1.22; 4927 women; 24 studies, moderate-certainty evidence). Furthermore, the results suggest that PCC may lead to a slight reduction in the risk of preterm delivery of 15%, (RR 0.85; 95% CI: 0.73–0.99; nine studies, 2414 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Moreover, PCC may result in risk reduction of perinatal mortality by 54%, (RR 0.46; 95% CI: 0.30–0.73; ten studies; 3071 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There is uncertainty about the effects of PCC on the early booking for antenatal care (MD 1.31; 95% CI: 1.40–1.23; five studies, 1081 women; very low-certainty evidence) and maternal hypoglycemia in the first trimester, (RR 1.38; 95% CI: 1.07–1.79; three studies; 686 women; very low- certainty evidence). In addition, results of the meta-analysis indicate that PCC may lead to 48% reduction in the risk of small for gestational age (SGA) (RR 0.52; 95% CI: 0.37–0.75; six studies, 2261 women; moderate-certainty evidence). PCC may reduce the risk of neonatal admission to intensive care unit (NICU) by 25% (RR 0.75; 95% CI: 0.67–0.84; four studies; 1322 women; moderate-certainty evidence). However, PCC may have little or no effect in reducing the cesarean section rate (RR 1.02; 95% CI: 0.96–1.07; 14 studies; 3641 women; low-certainty evidence); miscarriage rate (RR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.70–1.06; 11 studies; 2698 women; low-certainty evidence); macrosomia rate (RR 1.06; 95% CI: 0.97–1.15; nine studies; 2787 women, low-certainty evidence); neonatal hypoglycemia (RR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.74–1.18; five studies; 880 women; low-certainty evidence); respiratory distress syndrome (RR 0.78; 95% CI: 0.47–1.29; four studies; 466 women; very low-certainty evidence); or shoulder dystocia (RR 0.28; 95% CI: 0.07–1.12; 2 studies; 530 women; very low-certainty evidence).

Conclusion

PCC for women with pre-gestational type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus is effective in improving rates of congenital malformations. In addition, it may improve the risk of preterm delivery and admission to NICU. PCC probably reduces maternal HbA1C in the first trimester of pregnancy, perinatal mortality and SGA. There is uncertainty regarding the effects of PCC on early booking for antenatal care or maternal hypoglycemia during the first trimester of pregnancy. PCC has little or no effect on other maternal and perinatal outcomes.

Practical considerations for pregnant women with diabetes and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection

Epidemiologic data available so far suggest that individuals with diabetes, especially when not well controlled, are at a greater risk than the general population for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 morbidity such as acute respiratory distress syndrome, multiorgan failure, and mortality. Given the significant correlation between severity of coronavirus disease 2019 and diabetes mellitus and the lack of pregnancy-specific recommendations, we aim to provide some guidance and practical recommendations for the management of diabetes in pregnant women during the pandemic, especially for general obstetricians-gynecologists and nonobstetricians taking care of these patients.

A Florida public health-based endocrine clinic for low-income pregnant women with diabetes

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate pregnancy outcomes of low-income women with diabetes-complicated pregnancies who received care from an embedded, public health-based endocrine specialty clinic (ESC) in Florida.

DESIGN

This program evaluation used retrospective chart data to analyze client characteristics, pre-program and during-program glycemic control, and pregnancy outcomes of women enrolled in a prenatal ESC.

SAMPLE

Ninety-two low-income, pregnant women with type 1/type 2 diabetes or gestational diabetes (GDM) comprised this racially/ethnically diverse sample.

VARIABLES/ANALYSIS

Neonatal outcomes included frequencies of prematurity, hypoglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, and birth weight-for-gestational-age categories. Differences in maternal HbA1C at program entry and mean HbA1C during ESC care were determined by a Wilcoxon and paired sample t test.

RESULTS

HbA1C levels during ESC care (6.9 ± 1.4) were less than program entry HbA1C levels (7.9 ± 1.8) for women with pregestational diabetes (Z = -3.364, p = .001). Among women with GDM, mean HbA1C values during ESC care (5.5 ± 0.4) did not significantly differ (t(51) = -0.532, p > .05) from program entry HbA1C levels (5.5 ± 0.5), suggestive of glycemic goal achievement. No neonatal hypoglycemia or hyperbilirubinemia cases were observed in both groups. Approximately 11% of births were preterm, and 16% of neonates were large-for-gestational-age.

CONCLUSIONS

A public health-based ESC for low-income pregnant women with diabetes may positively affect pregnancy outcomes.

Stillbirth in women with diabetes: a retrospective analysis of fetal autopsy reports

Introduction: Diabetes in pregnancy is associated with an increased rate of stillbirth. There are a wide variety of factors that have been implicated including placental insufficiency, hypoxia, hyperinsulinemia and impaired cardiac function. Furthermore, there is evidence that diabetic pregnancies have an increased rate of fetal cardiomyopathy as compared to non-diabetic pregnancies. Prior studies have indicated that this association can also be an etiology for diabetic stillbirth. The purpose of this study was to determine if diabetic pregnancies have an increased risk of fetal cardiomyopathy identified on fetal autopsy as compared to non-diabetic women with a stillbirth in a cohort of pregnancies that had evaluation with a fetal autopsy.Materials and methods: Retrospective cohort study of women with a stillbirth who consented to fetal autopsy at an academic medical center from 2011 to 2017. Stillbirth was defined as an intrauterine fetal demise at ≥20 weeks' gestation. Women with diabetes defined as pre-gestational diabetes type 1, pre-gestational diabetes type 2, and gestational diabetes were compared to women without diabetes. Primary outcome was fetal cardiomyopathy. Other etiologies for stillbirth were also evaluated and classified according to the Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network (SCRN) initial causes of fetal death. Fisher exact test, χ2 test, and Mann Whitney U tests were performed as appropriate, with p < .05 considered significant. Generalized linear models were performed for fetal organ weights controlling for gestational age of delivery, maternal chronic hypertension, delivery body mass index, and birthweight.Results: A total of 78 women elected to have fetal autopsy examinations during the study period. Of these, 75 had complete information available for review. A total of 60 women did not have diabetes and 15 women had diabetes. Of pregnancies complicated by diabetes, 11 had insulin dependent diabetes and 4 had non-insulin dependent diabetes. Fetal cardiomyopathy was diagnosed on autopsy for 7 (46.7%) of pregnancies with diabetes and 2 (3.3% of pregnancies without diabetes (RR 14.00 [95% CI 3.23-60.65], p < .001). These associations were still significant even when analyzing only those pregnancies without fetal congenital heart disease (7 [46.7%] diabetic pregnancies with cardiomyopathy versus 1 [2.0%] nondiabetic pregnancy with cardiomyopathy, RR 23.80 [95% CI 3.17-178.46], p < .001). There was no difference between diabetic and non-diabetic pregnancies in regards to other causes for stillbirth. Stillbirths in pregnancies with diabetes also had larger fetal heart, liver, and adrenal weights on fetal autopsy.Conclusion: Women with diabetes have 14 times the risk of fetal cardiomyopathy identified at fetal autopsy as compared to women without diabetes. As the prediction and prevention of diabetic stillbirth is limited, information on potential causes of stillbirth may help future research identify those pregnancies at the greatest risk for adverse outcome.

Maternal health and non-communicable disease prevention: An investment case for the post COVID-19 world and need for better health economic data

An integrated approach to population health, disease surveillance, and preventive care will dominate the health agenda in the post COVID‐19 world. Because of their huge burden and the vulnerability imposed during a health crisis, prevention and care of non‐communicable diseases (NCDs) will need to be prioritized even further. Maternal and child health are inextricably linked with NCDs and their risk factors. The intergenerational impact of poor maternal nutrition and health conditions during pregnancy, particularly NCD‐related pregnancy complications, can be considered as a multiplier of the ongoing pandemic of NCDs. The economic cost of poor maternal health and NCD‐related pregnancy complications is likely very high, but is not adequately researched or documented in the context of long‐term population health. Interventions to address NCDs in pregnancy have beneficial effects on short‐term pregnancy outcomes; but even more importantly, identifying “at‐risk” mothers and offspring opens up the opportunity for targeted early preventive action. Preventive actions to address obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases have a common lifestyle approach—identifying any one of these problems in pregnancy provides an opportunity to address them all. Cost–benefit analyses that only focus on the short‐term and on one condition do not capture the full value of downstream, long‐term benefits for population health. This requires urgent attention from FIGO.

Integrated action on maternal health and non‐communicable disease prevention is an investment for future population health that requires more health economic data.

Telemedicine in High-Risk Obstetrics

Telemedicine involves the use of technology to provide services to patients and share medical information. Telemedicine's use has increased as technology has advanced. It allows for medicine to be practiced from a distance to reach patients in rural or underserved areas. Telemedicine has widespread uses in high-risk obstetrics, including management of diabetes, diagnosis and management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, screening for fetal malformations with teleultrasound, delivering care to underserved areas, and more. The use of telemedicine to provide care to patients and information to health care providers at a distance has been well accepted by the patients and providers.

Specific birth defects in pregnancies of women with diabetes: National Birth Defects Prevention Study, 1997-2011

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is associated with an increased risk for many birth defects and is likely to have an increasing impact on birth defect prevalence because of the rise in diabetes in the United States in recent decades. One of the first analyses in which specific birth defects were assessed for their relationship with both pregestational and gestational diabetes used data from the initial 6 years of the National Birth Defects Prevention Study. That analysis reported strong associations for pregestational diabetes with several birth defects, but few exposures among some of the less common birth defects led to unstable estimates with wide confidence intervals. Since that analysis, the study continued to collect data for another 8 years, including information on approximately 19,000 additional cases and 6900 additional controls.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to use data from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study, the largest population-based birth defects case-control study in the United States, to provide updated and more precise estimates of the association between diabetes and birth defects, including some defects not previously assessed.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed data on deliveries from October 1997 through December 2011. Mothers of case and control infants were interviewed about their health conditions and exposures during pregnancy, including diagnosis of pregestational (type 1 or type 2) diabetes before the index pregnancy or gestational diabetes during the index pregnancy. Using logistic regression, we separately assessed the association between pregestational and gestational diabetes with specific categories of structural birth defects for which there were at least 3 exposed case infants. For birth defect categories for which there were at least 5 exposed case infants, we calculated odds ratios adjusted for maternal body mass index, age, education, race/ethnicity, and study site; for defect categories with 3 or 4 exposed cases, we calculated crude odds ratios.

RESULTS

Pregestational diabetes was reported by 0.6% of mothers of control infants (71 of 11,447) and 2.5% of mothers of case infants (775 of 31,007). Gestational diabetes during the index pregnancy was reported by 4.7% of mothers of control infants (536 of 11,447) and 5.3% of mothers of case infants (1,653 of 31,007). Pregestational diabetes was associated with strong, statistically significant odds ratios (range, 2.5-80.2) for 46 of 50 birth defects considered. The largest odds ratio was observed for sacral agenesis (adjusted odds ratio, 80.2; 95% confidence interval, 46.1-139.3). A greater than 10-fold increased risk was also observed for holoprosencephaly (adjusted odds ratio, 13.1; 95% confidence interval, 7.0-24.5), longitudinal limb deficiency (adjusted odds ratio, 10.1; 95% confidence interval, 6.2-16.5), heterotaxy (adjusted odds ratio, 12.3; 95% confidence interval, 7.3-20.5), truncus arteriosus (adjusted odds ratio, 14.9; 95% confidence interval, 7.6-29.3), atrioventricular septal defect (adjusted odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 6.2-17.9), and single ventricle complex (adjusted odds ratio, 14.7; 95% confidence interval, 8.9-24.3). For gestational diabetes, statistically significant odds ratios were fewer (12 of 56) and of smaller magnitude (range, 1.3- 2.1; 0.5 for gastroschisis).

CONCLUSION

Pregestational diabetes is associated with a markedly increased risk for many specific births defects. Because glycemic control before pregnancy is associated with a reduced risk for birth defects, ongoing quality care for persons with diabetes is an important opportunity for prevention.

Management of pregestational diabetes mellitus: a comparison of guidelines

Background: Pregestational diabetes is associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. The aim of this study was to summarize and compare evidence-based recommendations on pregestational diabetes and to focus especially on issues related to the management of this entity.Materials and methods: A descriptive review of three recently published national guidelines on pregestational diabetes was conducted: the American Diabetes Association on "Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes - 2019," the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence on "Diabetes in pregnancy: management from preconception to the postnatal period" and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists on "Pregestational Diabetes Mellitus." These guidelines were compared according to recommendations on management, during the preconception, antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum period.Results: There were many similar recommendations regarding the preconception counseling, the antepartum assessment by specialists, the glycemic control target levels, the pharmacologic treatment and the postpartum period among the three guidelines. On the other hand, the American Diabetes Association makes no recommendations regarding fetal monitoring and obstetric management during pregnancy and the intrapartum period, while there are several similarities between the other two guidelines.Conclusions: The adoption of an international consensus based on evidence - based guidelines will increase the awareness of the healthcare professionals on the management of pregestational diabetes, leading that way to more favorable perinatal outcomes.

Perceptions and Behaviors Related to Contraceptive Use in the Postpartum Period Among Women With Pregestational Diabetes Mellitus

OBJECTIVE

To describe perceptions and behaviors related to contraception and preconception care and to test the association between these perceptions and contraceptive use in the postpartum period among women with pregestational diabetes mellitus.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional, descriptive survey.

SETTING

Three high-risk obstetric clinics in the Southeastern United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-five women who were 18 years or older with pregestational Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Between 4 and 8 weeks after birth, we used investigator-developed items and psychometrically validated scales to measure participants' perceptions and behaviors related to contraception and preconception care. We dichotomized use of contraception in the postpartum period as procedure/prescription or nonprescription/no method. We used multiple logistic regression to test the hypothesis that perceptions are associated with contraceptive use.

RESULTS

When data were collected 4 to 8 weeks after birth, almost half (49%, n = 27) of the participants had resumed sexual activity; however, most (95%, n = 52) did not want another pregnancy in the next 18 months. Fifty-six percent (n = 31) of participants used procedure/prescription contraception, and 44% (n = 24) used nonprescription/no method. Those who perceived contraception use and preconception care to be beneficial were more likely to use procedure/prescription contraception (adjusted odds ratio = 1.52; 95% confidence interval [1.07, 2.17]).

CONCLUSION

When caring for women in the postpartum period, providers should be mindful that women's perceptions of the benefits of contraception and preconception care may have implications for whether their use aligns with their reproductive goals and optimizes outcomes for future pregnancies.

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SPPC), a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Pregnancy outcomes associated with an abnormal 50-g glucose screen during pregnancy: a systematic review and Meta-analysis

Objective: To assess the association between an abnormal 1-h 50-g glucose challenge test (GCT) followed by a normal 3-h 100-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) on fetal macrosomia and other adverse outcomes.Data sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to March 2019.Methods of study selection: Any studies reporting adverse perinatal and/or maternal outcomes in women with an abnormal 50-g 1-h glucose challenge test (GCT) followed by a normal 3-h, 100-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) were included. Studies were critically appraised by three independent reviewers. Outcomes included fetal macrosomia, cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, birth weight, neonatal hypoglycemia, shoulder dystocia, NICU admission, respiratory morbidity, and low Apgar score. A random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) for each outcome with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 95% predictive intervals (PI).Tabulation, integration, and results: We identified 30 studies comprising 18,067 patients with a normal 3-h GTT after an abnormal 1-h GCT (study group) and 117,091 patients with a normal 1-h, 50-g GCT (comparison group). Patients in the study group had an increased risk of macrosomia (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.48-1.91, 27 studies, 132,027 patients), cesarean delivery (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.30-1.48, 24 studies, 128,495 women), preeclampsia (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.15-1.91, 17 studies, 110,930 patients), hypoglycemia (OR 1.43, CI 1.07-1.91) and shoulder dystocia (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.09-2.12, 9 studies, 41,229 patients). Neonatal birth weight was significantly higher in the study group. The incidence of NICU admission, low Apgar score, and respiratory morbidity was similar in the two groups. Controlling for body mass index and 1-h glucose screen cut off did not alter these results.Conclusion: Even in the absence of gestational diabetes, patients who fail the GCT test are at mildly increased risk of maternal and neonatal morbidity including macrosomia, cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, and shoulder dystocia.

14. Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Delivering family planning and preconception care to women with diabetes: Implementation challenges and promising strategies

Diabetes is increasingly prevalent among women of reproductive age and during pregnancy. The American Diabetes Association, which has called for improvements in the patient-centeredness of care, recommends preconception counseling and care for women of reproductive age with diabetes. However, data suggests this care is not sufficiently delivered. In this article, we describe demographic shifts in the need for preconception care and outline several changes at the clinical encounter as well as the health system- and community-levels that can help improve the delivery of diabetes-specific preconception care.