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.
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.
Authors: Amy E Haskins; Elizabeth R Bertone-Johnson; Penelope Pekow; Elena Carbone; Renée T Fortner; Lisa Chasan-Taber Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2010-09-17 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Eliana M Wendland; Maria Eugênia Pinto; Bruce B Duncan; José M Belizán; Maria Inês Schmidt Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2008-12-16 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Angela O'Dea; Jennifer J Infanti; Paddy Gillespie; Olga Tummon; Samuel Fanous; Liam G Glynn; Brian E McGuire; John Newell; Fidelma P Dunne Journal: Trials Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 2.279