Gestational diabetes mellitus: Compliance with testing

Trends in National Canadian Guideline Recommendations for the Screening and Diagnosis of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus over the Years: A Scoping Review

Canada's largest national obstetric and diabetology organizations have recommended various algorithms for the screening of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) over the years. Though uniformity across recommendations from clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is desirable, historically, national guidelines from Diabetes Canada (DC) and the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC) have differed. Lack of consensus has led to variation in screening approaches, rendering precise ascertainment of GDM prevalence challenging. To highlight the reason and level of disparity in Canada, we conducted a scoping review of CPGs released by DC and the SOGC over the last thirty years and distributed a survey on screening practices among Canadian physicians. Earlier CPGs were based on expert opinion, leading to different recommendations from these organizations. However, as a result of the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) study, disparities between DC and the SOGC no longer exist and many Canadian physicians have adopted their recent recommendations. Given that Canadian guidelines now recommend two different screening programs (one step vs. two step), lack of consensus on a single diagnostic threshold continues to exist, resulting in differing estimates of GDM prevalence. Our scoping review highlights these disparities and provides a step forward towards reaching a consensus on one unified threshold.

Fasting target for hyperglycaemia in pregnancy

Knowledge of the fasting plasma glucose of healthy women may assist in the setting of treatment targets for women with hyperglycaemia in pregnancy (HIP). This study examines the pregnancy glucose tolerance test results of 3344 women without HIP collected over a three-year period. The median fasting plasma glucose was 4.4 mmol/L with an interquartile range of 4.2-4.6 mmol/L and a 5th to 95th centile of 3.8-4.9 mmol/L. As the diagnostic fasting glucose level for HIP is ≥5.1 mmol/L, these data support a treatment target of ≤5.0 mmol/L.

The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy in Australia

BACKGROUND

The Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS) has recently endorsed the World Health Organization (WHO) terminology and classification of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy. The prevalence is likely to increase, but no prospective data are available for a representative Australian population.

AIMS

To determine the prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy (HIP) using results from both the public and private sectors in a population that has a similar ethnicity to the overall Australian population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The results of all pregnancy oral glucose tolerance tests (POGTT) in the public sector and by a dominant private pathology provider in a major city have been prospectively collected for a three-year period and analysed using the ADIPS (WHO) criteria.

RESULTS

The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy (HIP) was 13.1% with diabetes mellitus in pregnancy (DIP) being 0.4% and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) being 12.7%.

CONCLUSION

The new criteria will diagnose about one-third more women with GDM than the previous ADIPS criteria. This will have resource and health implications. Focussed local health economic data will be important.

From screening to postpartum follow-up - the determinants and barriers for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) services, a systematic review

Background

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) – a transitory form of diabetes first recognised during pregnancy complicates between < 1% and 28% of all pregnancies. GDM has important short and long-term health consequences for both the mother and her offspring. To prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes and to prevent or delay future onset of type 2 diabetes in mother and offspring, timely detection, optimum treatment, and preventive postpartum care and follow-up is necessary. However the area remains grossly under-prioritised.

Methods

To investigate determinants and barriers to GDM care from initial screening and diagnosis to prenatal treatment and postpartum follow-up, a PubMed database search to identify quantitative and qualitative studies on the subject was done in September 2012. Fifty-eight relevant studies were reviewed.

Results

Adherence to prevailing GDM screening guidelines and compliance to screening tests seems sub-optimal at best and arbitrary at worst, with no clear or consistent correlation to health care provider, health system or client characteristics. Studies indicate that most women express commitment and motivation for behaviour change to protect the health of their unborn baby, but compliance to recommended treatment and advice is fraught with challenges, and precious little is known about health system or societal factors that hinder compliance and what can be done to improve it. A number of barriers related to health care provider/system and client characteristics have been identified by qualitative studies. Immediately following a GDM pregnancy many women, when properly informed, desire and intend to maintain healthy lifestyles to prevent future diabetes, but find the effort challenging. Adherence to recommended postpartum screening and continued lifestyle modifications seems even lower. Here too, health care provider, health system and client related determinants and barriers were identified. Studies reveal that sense of self-efficacy and social support are key determinants.

Conclusions

The paper identifies and discusses determinants and barriers for GDM care, fully recognising that these are highly dependent on the context.

Surprisingly low compliance to local guidelines for risk factor based screening for gestational diabetes mellitus - A population-based study

Background

Screening for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is routine during pregnancy in many countries in the world. The screening programs are either based on general screening offered to all pregnant women or risk factor based screening stipulated in local clinical guidelines. The aims of this study were to investigate: 1) the compliance with local guidelines of screening for GDM and 2) the outcomes of pregnancy and birth in relation to risk factors of GDM and whether or not exposed to oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

Methods

This study design was a population-based retrospective cross-sectional study of 822 women. A combination of questionnaire data and data collected from medical records was applied. Compliance to the local guidelines of risk factor based screening for GDM was examined and a comparison of outcomes of pregnancy and delivery in relation to risk factor groups for GDM was performed.

Results

Of the 822 participants, 257 (31.3%) women fulfilled at least one criterion for being exposed to screening for GDM according to the local clinical guidelines. However, only 79 (30.7%) of these women were actually exposed to OGTT and of those correctly exposed for screening, seven women were diagnosed with GDM. Women developing risk factors for GDM during pregnancy had a substantially increased risk of giving birth to an infant with macrosomia.

Conclusion

Surprisingly low compliance with the local clinical guidelines for screening for GDM during pregnancy was found. Furthermore, the prevalence of the risk factors of GDM in our study was almost doubled compared to previous Swedish studies. Pregnant women developing risk factors of GDM during pregnancy were found to be at substantially increased risk of giving birth to an infant with macrosomia. There is a need of actions improving compliance to the local guidelines.

Can a low-glycemic index diet reduce the need for insulin in gestational diabetes mellitus? A randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

A low-glycemic index diet is effective as a treatment for individuals with diabetes and has been shown to improve pregnancy outcomes when used from the first trimester. A low-glycemic index diet is commonly advised as treatment for women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). However, the efficacy of this advice and associated pregnancy outcomes have not been systematically examined. The purpose of this study was to determine whether prescribing a low-glycemic index diet for women with GDM could reduce the number of women requiring insulin without compromise of pregnancy outcomes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

All women with GDM seen over a 12-month period were considered for inclusion in the study. Women (n = 63) were randomly assigned to receive either a low-glycemic index diet or a conventional high-fiber (and higher glycemic index) diet.

RESULTS

Of the 31 women randomly assigned to a low-glycemic index diet, 9 (29%) required insulin. Of the women randomly assigned to a higher-glycemic index diet, a significantly higher proportion, 19 of 32 (59%), met the criteria to commence insulin treatment (P = 0.023). However, 9 of these 19 women were able to avoid insulin use by changing to a low-glycemic index diet. Key obstetric and fetal outcomes were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a low-glycemic index diet for women with GDM effectively halved the number needing to use insulin, with no compromise of obstetric or fetal outcomes.

Specific information about the WHO guidelines for gestational diabetes screening improves clinical practices

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of specific information on World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) screening on clinical practices and to estimate its acceptance by women.

METHODS

A non-randomized interventional study, comparing two periods, that is, before (period I) and after (period II) the implementation of the WHO guidelines during year 2000 in three obstetrical units, using reminders, meetings and pre-printed prescription sheets. Women were interviewed on GDM screening acceptance.

RESULTS

A total of 333 pregnant women were included in period I and 345 in period II. The proportion of women who were screened significantly increased between period I and period II (0.9% in period I, 59.1% in period II, P < 10(-3)). The screening test was realized in accordance with guidelines for 80% of women in period II. The acceptability of the test by women was estimated at 98%. Furthermore, 90% of them would accept to be screened again during another pregnancy.

DISCUSSION

Specific information about WHO screening guidelines improves doctor practices. Moreover, the high rate of acceptance by women is an argument to promote more widespread WHO screening for GDM during pregnancy.

Universal rather than selective screening for gestational diabetes mellitus may improve fetal outcomes

AIM

The benefit of treating gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has recently been shown. The aim of this study was to compare offspring and maternal health benefits from selective or universal screening for GDM.

METHODS

The incidence of outcomes was compared in three series of pregnant women: 1) the 159 consecutive women with GDM out of the 1909 women who delivered between October 2000 and September 2001: during this period screening for GDM was based on risk factors (risk factor-GDM); 2) the 265 consecutive women with GDM out of the 2111 women who delivered during the year 2002: during this period screening for GDM was universal (universal-GDM); 3) 1255 women with no GDM during year 2002 (controls).

RESULTS

After adjustment for age, pregravid body mass index, parity, and ethnicity, the risk of large for gestational age (Odds ratio 2.19[95% confidence interval 1.36-3.54], P < 10(-3)), delivery before 37 weeks of gestation (OR 2.44 [95CI 1.32-4.51], P = 0.004), jaundice (OR 3.31[95CI 1.58-6.93], P = 0.002), hospitalization in the department of pediatrics (OR 2.35 [95CI 1.53-3.61], P < 10(-3)) was higher in the GDM-risk factor group than in the control group, whereas it was similar in the universal-GDM group and the control group. Compared with the control group, the risk of anticipated delivery and hospital stay > 4 days after delivery was increased in the GDM-risk factor group (OR 2.69[1.88-3.84], P < 10(-3); and OR 2.6 [1.82-3.71], P < 10(-3) respectively) and the universal-GDM group (OR 1.54 [1.15-2.07] P = 0.004; and OR 1.49 [1.13-1.97], P = 0.005 respectively).

CONCLUSION

This observational study suggests that universal rather than selective screening for GDM may improve outcomes. Universal screening might reduce delay of diagnosis and care.

Gestational diabetes: Is there a relationship between leg length and glucose tolerance?

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relationship between leg length and glucose tolerance in pregnancy.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The leg length and leg-to-height percentage were prospectively determined on 161 glucose-tolerant women during pregnancy and 61 women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

RESULTS

Women with GDM were a mean of 2.8 cm shorter than women who were glucose tolerant, due entirely to their leg lengths being a mean of 3.2 cm shorter. With respect to the 2-h result on the glucose tolerance test (GTT), there were negative correlations for height (r = -0.161, P = 0.017), leg length (r = -0.266, P < 0.0005), and the leg-to-height percentage (r = -0.294, P < 0.0005). The correlation between the leg-to-height percentage and the 2-h result on the GTT remained significant after adjustment for age (r = -0.252, P < 0.0005) and for age and BMI (r = -0.224, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with GDM are shorter than glucose-tolerant women and have a lower leg-to-height percentage. Consideration of short stature as a risk factor for GDM is not valid without taking into account the leg-to-height percentage.