Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAvalos, G. E.
dc.contributor.authorOwens, L. A.
dc.contributor.authorDunne, F.
dc.contributor.author,
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-20T16:00:14Z
dc.date.available2018-09-20T16:00:14Z
dc.date.issued2013-06-11
dc.identifier.citationAvalos, G. E. Owens, L. A.; Dunne, F.; , (2013). Applying current screening tools for gestational diabetes mellitus to a european population: is it time for change?. Diabetes Care 36 (10), 3040-3044
dc.identifier.issn0149-5992,1935-5548
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10379/10309
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVEThe optimal screening regimen for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) remains controversial. Risk factors used in selective screening guidelines vary. Given that universal screening is not currently adopted in our European population, we aimed to evaluate which selective screening strategies were most applicable.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSBetween 2007 and 2009, 5,500 women were universally screened for GDM, and a GDM prevalence of 12.4% using International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria was established. We retrospectively applied selective screening guidelines to this cohort.RESULTSWhen we applied National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), Irish, and American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines, 54% (2,576), 58% (2,801), and 76% (3,656) of women, respectively, had at least one risk factor for GDM and would have undergone testing. However, when NICE, Irish, and ADA guidelines were applied, 20% (120), 16% (101), and 5% (31) of women, respectively, had no risk factor and would have gone undiagnosed. Using a BMI 30 kg/m(2) for screening has a specificity of 81% with moderate sensitivity at 48%. Reducing the BMI to 25 kg/m(2) (ADA) increases the sensitivity to 80% with a specificity of 44%. Women with no risk factors diagnosed with GDM on universal screening had more adverse pregnancy outcomes than those with normal glucose tolerance.CONCLUSIONSThis analysis provides a strong argument for universal screening. However, if selective screening were adopted, the ADA guidelines would result in the highest rate of diagnosis and the lowest number of missed cases.
dc.publisherAmerican Diabetes Association
dc.relation.ispartofDiabetes Care
dc.subjectpregnancy outcomes
dc.subjectglucose
dc.subjectwomen
dc.subjectprevalence
dc.subjectrisk
dc.subjectdip
dc.titleApplying current screening tools for gestational diabetes mellitus to a european population: is it time for change?
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.doi10.2337/dc12-2669
dc.local.publishedsourcehttp://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/diacare/36/10/3040.full.pdf
nui.item.downloads0


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record