OBJECTIVE: To compare maternal and neonatal complications ofgestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) between conservative and systematic management. MATERIAL AND METHOD: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at Thammasat University Hospital, Thailand. GDM subjects who were diagnosed and treated from October 2004 to March 2007 were classified as the conservative management group (CMG). The participants who were diagnosed and treated from April 2007 to September 2009 were classified as the systematic management group (SMG). SMG was ambulatory-managed per standard protocol by a multidisciplinary team (physician, diabetes nurse case manager nutritionist and pharmacologist). RESULTS: There were 87 and 118 subjects in CMG and SMG, respectively. Mean age and body mass index before pregnancy in CMG and SMG were not statistical different. Oral glucose tolerance tests (50 and 100 gram) were similar in both groups. The prevalence of GDM A2 was 57.5 and 55.1% in CMG and SMG, respectively. Mean gestational age at DM clinic consultation and number of hospital admission of SMG was less than CMG (p < 0.001). Neonatal hypoglycemic episode in SMG was less than CMG (1.7 vs. 10.3; p = 0.007). Postpartum 75-gram glucose tolerance test appointments and percentages of underwent in SMG were more than CMG (p < 0.001). Other composite maternal and neonatal outcomes were not different in either group. CONCLUSION: Systematic management by a multidisciplinary team conducted according to a practical guideline has the benefit of neonatal hypoglycemia reduction and hospital admission included postpartum DM surveillance increments.
OBJECTIVE: To compare maternal and neonatal complications ofgestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) between conservative and systematic management. MATERIAL AND METHOD: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at Thammasat University Hospital, Thailand. GDM subjects who were diagnosed and treated from October 2004 to March 2007 were classified as the conservative management group (CMG). The participants who were diagnosed and treated from April 2007 to September 2009 were classified as the systematic management group (SMG). SMG was ambulatory-managed per standard protocol by a multidisciplinary team (physician, diabetes nurse case manager nutritionist and pharmacologist). RESULTS: There were 87 and 118 subjects in CMG and SMG, respectively. Mean age and body mass index before pregnancy in CMG and SMG were not statistical different. Oral glucose tolerance tests (50 and 100 gram) were similar in both groups. The prevalence of GDM A2 was 57.5 and 55.1% in CMG and SMG, respectively. Mean gestational age at DM clinic consultation and number of hospital admission of SMG was less than CMG (p < 0.001). Neonatal hypoglycemic episode in SMG was less than CMG (1.7 vs. 10.3; p = 0.007). Postpartum 75-gram glucose tolerance test appointments and percentages of underwent in SMG were more than CMG (p < 0.001). Other composite maternal and neonatal outcomes were not different in either group. CONCLUSION: Systematic management by a multidisciplinary team conducted according to a practical guideline has the benefit of neonatal hypoglycemia reduction and hospital admission included postpartum DM surveillance increments.
Authors: Thubasni Kunasegaran; Vinod R M T Balasubramaniam; Valliammai Jayanthi Thirunavuk Arasoo; Uma Devi Palanisamy; Amutha Ramadas Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-31 Impact factor: 3.390