Cargando…

Implementation of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Criteria: Not Always a Cause for Concern

Background. Controversy surrounds the decision to adopt the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) as fears that disease prevalence rates will soar have been raised. Aims. To investigate the prevalen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sibartie, Pooja, Quinlivan, Julie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4692988/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26788370
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/754085
_version_ 1782407299415932928
author Sibartie, Pooja
Quinlivan, Julie
author_facet Sibartie, Pooja
Quinlivan, Julie
author_sort Sibartie, Pooja
collection PubMed
description Background. Controversy surrounds the decision to adopt the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) as fears that disease prevalence rates will soar have been raised. Aims. To investigate the prevalence of pregnancy complicated with GDM before and after the introduction of the IADPSG 2010 diagnostic criteria. Materials and Methods. A prospective audit of all women who delivered from July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2014, in a predefined geographic region within the North Metropolitan Health Service of Western Australia. Women were diagnosed with GDM according to Australian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS 1991) criteria until December 31, 2011, and by the IADPSG 2010 criteria after this date. Incidence of GDM and predefined pregnancy outcomes were audited. Results. Of 10,296 women, antenatal oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) results and follow-up data were obtained for 10,103 women (98%), of whom 349 (3.5%) were diagnosed with GDM. The rate of GDM utilising ADIPS criteria was 3.4% and the rate of utilising IADPSG criteria was 3.5% (p = 0.92). Conclusion. IADPSG diagnostic criteria did not significantly increase the incidence of GDM in this low prevalence region.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4692988
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46929882016-01-19 Implementation of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Criteria: Not Always a Cause for Concern Sibartie, Pooja Quinlivan, Julie J Pregnancy Research Article Background. Controversy surrounds the decision to adopt the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) as fears that disease prevalence rates will soar have been raised. Aims. To investigate the prevalence of pregnancy complicated with GDM before and after the introduction of the IADPSG 2010 diagnostic criteria. Materials and Methods. A prospective audit of all women who delivered from July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2014, in a predefined geographic region within the North Metropolitan Health Service of Western Australia. Women were diagnosed with GDM according to Australian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS 1991) criteria until December 31, 2011, and by the IADPSG 2010 criteria after this date. Incidence of GDM and predefined pregnancy outcomes were audited. Results. Of 10,296 women, antenatal oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) results and follow-up data were obtained for 10,103 women (98%), of whom 349 (3.5%) were diagnosed with GDM. The rate of GDM utilising ADIPS criteria was 3.4% and the rate of utilising IADPSG criteria was 3.5% (p = 0.92). Conclusion. IADPSG diagnostic criteria did not significantly increase the incidence of GDM in this low prevalence region. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015 2015-12-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4692988/ /pubmed/26788370 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/754085 Text en Copyright © 2015 P. Sibartie and J. Quinlivan. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Sibartie, Pooja
Quinlivan, Julie
Implementation of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Criteria: Not Always a Cause for Concern
title Implementation of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Criteria: Not Always a Cause for Concern
title_full Implementation of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Criteria: Not Always a Cause for Concern
title_fullStr Implementation of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Criteria: Not Always a Cause for Concern
title_full_unstemmed Implementation of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Criteria: Not Always a Cause for Concern
title_short Implementation of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Criteria: Not Always a Cause for Concern
title_sort implementation of the international association of diabetes and pregnancy study groups criteria: not always a cause for concern
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4692988/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26788370
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/754085
work_keys_str_mv AT sibartiepooja implementationoftheinternationalassociationofdiabetesandpregnancystudygroupscriterianotalwaysacauseforconcern
AT quinlivanjulie implementationoftheinternationalassociationofdiabetesandpregnancystudygroupscriterianotalwaysacauseforconcern