Adherence rates to a prediction tool identifying women with an increased gestational diabetes risk: An implementation study.

OBJECTIVE: The best screening strategy for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) remains a topic of debate. Several organizations made a statement in favor of universal screening, but the volume of oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) required may burden healthcare systems. As a result, many countries still rely on selective screening using a checklist of risk factors, but reported diagnostic characteristics vary. Moreover, women's discomfort due to an OGTT is often neglected. Since 2017, obstetric healthcare professionals in a Dutch region assessed women's GDM risk with a prediction model and counseled those with an increased risk regarding an OGTT. METHODS: From 2017 to 2018, 865 women were recruited in a multicenter prospective cohort. RESULTS: In total, 385 women (48%) had an increased predicted GDM risk. Of all women, 78% reported that their healthcare professional discussed their GDM risk. Predicted GDM risks were positively correlated with conducting an OGTT. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a GDM prediction model resulted in moderate rates of OGTTs performed in general, but high rates in high-risk women. As 25% of women experienced discomfort from the OGTT, a selective screening strategy based on a prediction model with a high detection rate may be an interesting alternative to universal screening. STUDY COHORT REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register: NTR4143; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4143.

The Optimized Calculation Method for Insulin Dosage in an Insulin Tolerance Test (ITT): A Randomized Parallel Control Study.

Objective: To explore the most suitable calculation method for insulin dosage in an insulin tolerance test (ITT) and to evaluate the clinical application value of the optimization coefficient (γ). Methods: In this study, 140 adult patients with congenital growth hormone deficiency (GHD) or acquired hypopituitarism were randomized into the following two groups: the conventional group (n = 70) and the optimized group (n = 70). Oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs), insulin release tests (IRTs), and ITTs were conducted. For ITTs, insulin doses were the product of body weight (kg) and related coefficient (0.15 IU/kg for the control group and γ IU/kg for the optimized group, respectively). Notably, γ was defined as -0.034 + 0.000176 × AUCINS + 0.009846 × BMI, which was based on our previous study. Results: In the ITTs, the rate of achieving adequate hypoglycemia with a single insulin dose was significantly higher for the optimized group compared with the conventional group (92.9 vs. 60.0%, P < 0.001). The optimized group required higher initial doses of insulin (0.23 IU/kg). Meanwhile, the two groups did not differ significantly in their nadir blood glucose (1.9 vs. 1.9 mmol/L, P = 0.828). Conclusion: This study confirmed that the proposed optimized calculation method for insulin dosage in ITTs led to more efficient hypoglycemia achievement, without increasing the incidence of serious adverse events.

Clinical and Public Health Implications of 2019 Endocrine Society Guidelines for Diagnosis of Diabetes in Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: Screening for diabetes is typically done using hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) or fasting plasma glucose (FPG). The 2019 Endocrine Society guidelines recommend further testing using an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in older adults with prediabetic HbA1c or FPG. We evaluated the impact of this recommendation on diabetes prevalence, eligibility for glucose-lowering treatment, and estimated cost of implementation in a nationally representative sample. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included 2,236 adults aged ≥65 years without known diabetes from the 2005-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Diabetes was defined using: 1) the Endocrine Society approach (HbA1c ≥6.5%, FPG ≥126 mg/dL, or 2-h plasma glucose ≥200 mg/dL among those with HbA1c 5.7-6.4% or FPG 100-125 mg/dL); and 2) a standard approach (HbA1c ≥6.5% or FPG ≥126 mg/dL). Treatment eligibility was defined using HbA1c cut points (≥7% to ≥9%). OGTT screening costs were estimated using Medicare fee schedules. RESULTS: Diabetes prevalence was 15.7% (∼5.0 million) using the Endocrine Society's approach and 7.3% (∼2.3 million) using the standard approach. Treatment eligibility ranged from 5.4% to 0.06% and 11.8% to 1.3% for diabetes cases identified through the Endocrine Society or standard approach, respectively. By definition, diabetes identified exclusively through the Endocrine Society approach had HbA11c <6.5% and would not be recommended for glucose-lowering treatment. Screening all older adults with prediabetic HbA1c/FPG (∼18.3 million) with OGTT could cost between $737 million and $1.7 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Adopting the 2019 Endocrine Society guidelines would substantially increase the number of older adults classified as having diabetes, require significant financial resources, but likely offer limited benefits.

Two criteria of oral glucose tolerance test to diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE To evaluate two different criteria, one or two cut-off values, of oral glucose tolerance test with 75g of glucose for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus. METHODS A cross-sectional study involving 120 records of pregnant women who received prenatal care at the service of a Brazilian university was carried out. Bivariate analysis of obstetric and perinatal outcomes was performed using the chi-square test. RESULTS Considering criterion I, 12.5% of patients were diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus. Patients were 3.57 times more likely to have a large fetus for the gestational age at birth (p=0.038). Using criterion II, gestational diabetes mellitus was diagnosed in 5.8% of patients, macrosomia was 7.73 times more likely to be found in the presence of gestational diabetes mellitus (p=0.004), and a large fetus for the gestational age at birth was 8.17 times more likely (p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS There was a difference in the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus between the two criteria analyzed. The new criterion proposed increased prevalence.

RESUMO OBJETIVO Avaliar dois critérios distintos, um ou dois valores de corte, do teste oral de tolerância à glicose com 75 g de glicose para o diagnóstico de diabetes mellitus gestacional. Métodos Estudo transversal envolvendo 120 prontuários de gestantes que realizaram pré-natal em um ambulatório de uma universidade brasileira. Análise bivariada dos resultados obstétricos e perinatais foi realizada pelo teste do qui-quadrado. Resultados Considerando o critério I, 12,5% das pacientes foram diagnosticadas com diabetes mellitus gestacional. As pacientes apresentaram uma chance 3,57 maior de ter um feto grande para a idade gestacional (p=0,038). Utilizando o critério II, o diabetes mellitus gestacional foi diagnosticado em 5,8% das pacientes. Mediante esse critério diagnóstico, a chance de macrossomia foi 7,73 vezes mais provável na presença de diabetes mellitus gestacional (p=0,004) e a chance de um feto grande para a idade gestacional foi 8,17 vezes maior de ocorrer (p=0,004). Conclusões Observou-se diferença na prevalência de diabetes melittus gestacional entre os dois critérios analisados, sendo que o novo critério proposto aumentou a prevalência.

Cystic Fibrosis-Related Diabetes Screening in Adults: A Gap Analysis and Evaluation of Accuracy of Glycated Hemoglobin Levels.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify the gap in cystic fibrosis-related diabetes (CFRD) screening by means of an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in our tertiary care clinic. Our second aim was to identify the glycated hemoglobin level (A1C) threshold that optimizes sensitivity and specificity for predicting CFRD and impaired glucose tolerance. METHODS: This retrospective study used data housed in the Toronto cystic fibrosis (CF) database. The study population included all adult (≥18 years of age) patients seen in the CF clinic between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2015. Descriptive statistics were used for the OGTT gap analysis; the CFRD screening rate was calculated on an annual basis as the proportion of eligible patients who received OGTTs. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using OGTTs as the reference standard and A1C levels as the index test on a sample size of 320 patients. RESULTS: On average, 48.5% of eligible individuals were screened each year for CFRD by OGTTs. A1C thresholds of 5.5% had a sensitivity of 91.8% (75%) and a specificity of 34.1% (33.4%) for the diagnosis of CFRD (and impaired glucose tolerance), respectively. Of the 229 patients with A1C levels <5.5%, 5 test results (2.2%) had OGTTs indicative of CFRD. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of CFRD screening is suboptimal. An alternative screening algorithm using an A1C threshold of 5.5% has the potential to reduce the requirement for OGTTs by 36.7%. A1C levels cannot be used to identify impaired glucose tolerance.

ß-Cell secretory defects are present in pancreatic insufficient cystic fibrosis with 1-hour oral glucose tolerance test glucose ≥155 mg/dL.

BACKGROUND: Patients with pancreatic insufficient cystic fibrosis (PI-CF) meeting standard criteria for normal glucose tolerance display impaired ß-cell secretory capacity and early-phase insulin secretion defects. We sought evidence of impaired ß-cell secretory capacity, a measure of functional ß-cell mass, among those with early glucose intolerance (EGI), defined as 1-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) glucose ≥155 mg/dL (8.6 mmol/L). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Penn and CHOP Clinical & Translational Research Centers. PI-CF categorized by OGTT as normal (PI-NGT: 1-hour glucose <155 mg/dL and 2-hour <140 mg/dL [7.8 mmol/L]; n = 13), PI-EGI (1-hour ≥155 mg/dL and 2-hour <140 mg/dL; n = 13), impaired (PI-IGT: 2-hour ≥140 and <200 mg/dL [11.1 mmol/L]; n = 8), and diabetic (cystic fibrosis-related diabetes, CFRD: 2-hour ≥200 mg/dL; n = 8) participated. Post-prandial glucose tolerance and insulin secretion, and ß-cell secretory capacity and demand were derived from mixed-meal tolerance tests (MMTTs), and glucose-potentiated arginine (GPA) tests, respectively. RESULTS: PI-EGI had elevated post-prandial glucose with reduced early-phase insulin secretion during MMTT compared to PI-NGT (P < .05). PI-EGI also exhibited impaired acute insulin and C-peptide responses to GPA (P < .01 vs PI-NGT), measures of ß-cell secretory capacity. Proinsulin secretory ratios were higher under hyperglycemic clamp conditions in PI-IGT and CFRD (P < .05 vs PI-NGT), and correlated with 1-hour glucose in PI-CF (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: PI-CF patients with 1-hour OGTT glucose ≥155 mg/dL already manifest impaired ß-cell secretory capacity with associated early-phase insulin secretion defects. Avoiding hyperglycemia in patients with EGI may be important for preventing excessive insulin demand indicated by disproportionately increased proinsulin secretion.

Review of Pre-Analytical Errors in Oral Glucose Tolerance Testing in a Tertiary Care Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The pre-pre-analytical and pre-analytical phases form a major chunk of the errors in a laboratory. The process has taken into consideration a very common procedure which is the oral glucose tolerance test to identify the pre-pre-analytical errors. Quality indicators provide evidence of quality, support accountability and help in the decision making of laboratory personnel. The aim of this research is to evaluate pre-analytical performance of the oral glucose tolerance test procedure. METHODS: An observational study that was conducted overa period of three months, in the phlebotomy and accessioning unit of our laboratory using questionnaire that examined the pre-pre-analytical errors through a scoring system. The pre-analytical phase was analyzed for each sample collected as per seven quality indicators. RESULTS: About 25% of the population gave wrong answer with regard to the question that tested the knowledge of patient preparation. The appropriateness of test result QI-1 had the most error. Although QI-5 for sample collection had a low error rate, it is a very important indicator as any wrongly collected sample can alter the test result. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluating the pre-analytical and pre-pre-analytical phase is essential and must be conducted routinely on a yearly basis to identify errors and take corrective action and to facilitate their gradual introduction into routine practice.

Glucose Homeostasis Markers in Beta-Thalassemia.

BACKGROUND: Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) has been a well-recognized marker of glucose homeostasis among thalassemics. Recently some studies have proposed the role of fructosamine as a better marker as compared with HbA1c. Hence, the study was carried out to find out which marker holds promise among Indian beta-thalassemic children. METHODS: In this case-control study, 60 diagnosed cases of beta-thalassemia major and equal number of normal controls who were ≥8 years of age were enrolled. HbA1c, fructosamine, and fasting insulin levels were measured in all. Oral glucose tolerance test was done as a gold standard and the measured parameters were compared. RESULTS: HbA1c was significantly higher in cases (7.10% [±0.47%]) than in controls (5.15% [±0.19%]) (P<0.001). Thalassemics with abnormal glucose tolerance had higher HbA1c level (7.34% [±0.57%]) than those with normal glucose tolerance (7.05% [±0.43%]) (P=0.05). Insulin resistance was noticed among thalassemics with abnormal glucose tolerance as compared with their normal counterparts (P=0.04). No significant difference was found in fructosamine levels between cases (239.80 [±31.80] µmol/L) and controls (234.10 [±21.34] µmol/L) (P=0.25) or between thalassemics with abnormal glucose tolerance (243.92 [±21.94] µmol/L) and their normal counterparts (238.77 [±33.93] µmol/L) (P=0.62). CONCLUSIONS: The use of HbA1c as a diagnostic marker for diabetes in hemolytic anemias has to be done with caution as its baseline values are higher in them. Despite this finding, HbA1c continues to be a good marker for worsening glucose homeostasis in thalassemics as higher values were found in thalassemics with abnormal glucose tolerance compared with their normal counterparts. The present study did not find any relationship of fructosamine levels with impaired glucose tolerance in beta-thalassemia.

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Using the Fasting Plasma Glucose Level to Simplify the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Diagnostic Algorithm in an Adult South Asian Population.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the value of the fasting plasma glucose (FPG) level for simplifying the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) diagnostic algorithm of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in a South Asian population. METHODS: In 6,520 pregnant women undergoing universal screening with the 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), the area under receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the overall FPG performance to detect GDM (IADPSG criteria). Specifically, 2 different FPG thresholds of the OGTT were used to rule in and rule out GDM so as to decrease the need for the cumbersome OGTT. RESULTS: GDM was present in 1,193 (18.3%) women. The FPG 1) area under receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) was 0.909 (0.898 to 0.920); 2) threshold of ≥5.1 mmol/L independently could rule in GDM in 708 (10.9%) women (100% specificity); 3) threshold of <4.3 mmol/L independently could rule out GDM in an additional 2,389 (36.6%) women (95.6% sensitivity). CONCLUSIONS: By circumventing nearly one half the OGTTs, an initial FPG can simplify the onerous GDM diagnostic IADPSG algorithm in this population parochially and in countries with large South Asian immigrant populations-without compromising medical care.

Are women positive for the One Step but negative for the Two Step screening tests for gestational diabetes at higher risk for adverse outcomes?

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate if women meeting criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) by the One Step test as per International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria but not by other less strict criteria have adverse pregnancy outcomes compared with GDM-negative controls. The primary outcome was the incidence of macrosomia, defined as birthweight > 4000 g. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from their inception until May 2017. All studies identifying pregnant women negative at the Two Step test, but positive at the One Step test for IADPSG criteria were included. We excluded studies that randomized women to the One Step vs. the Two Step tests; studies that compared different criteria within the same screening method; randomized studies comparing treatments for GDM; and studies comparing incidence of GDM in women doing the One Step test vs. the Two Step test. RESULTS: Eight retrospective cohort studies, including 29 983 women, were included. Five study groups and four control groups were identified. The heterogeneity between the studies was high. Gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and large for gestational age, as well as in some analyses cesarean delivery, macrosomia and preterm birth, were significantly more frequent, and small for gestational age in some analyses significantly less frequent, in women GDM-positive by the One Step, but not the Two Step. CONCLUSION: Women meeting criteria for GDM by IADPSG criteria but not by other less strict criteria have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes such as gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and large for gestational age, compared with GDM-negative controls. Based on these findings, and evidence from other studies that treatment decreases these adverse outcomes, we suggest screening for GDM using the One Step IADPSG criteria.

Development of new diabetes risk scores on the basis of the current definition of diabetes in Japanese subjects [Rapid Communication].

To develop diabetes risk score (RS) based on the current definition of diabetes, we retrospectively analyzed consecutive 4,159 health examinees who were non-diabetic at baseline. Diabetes, diagnosed by fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥7.0 mmol/L, 2hPG ≥11.1 mmol/L and/or HbA1c ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol), developed in 279 of them during the mean period of 4.9 years. A full RS (RSFull), a RS without 2hPG (RS-2hPG) and a non-invasive RS (RSNI) were created on the basis of multivariate Cox proportional model by weighted grading based on hazard ratio in half the persons assigned. The RSs were verified in the remaining half of the participants. Positive family history (FH), male sex, smoking and higher age, systolic blood pressure (SBP), FPG, 2hPG and HbA1c were independent predictors for RSFull. For RS-2hPG, 7 independent predictors, exclusive of 2hPG and smoking but inclusive of elevated triglycerides (TG) comparing to RSFull, were selected. FH, male sex, and higher age, SBP and HbA1c were independent predictors in RSNI. In the validation cohort, C-statistic (95%CI) of RSFull, RS-2hPG and RSNI were 0.80 (0.76-0.84), 0.75 (0.70-0.78) and 0.68 (0.63-0.72), respectively, which were significantly different from each other (P <0.01). Absolute percentage difference between predicted probability and observed diabetes were 1.9%, 0.7% and 0.9%, by the three scores, respectively, and not significantly different from each other. In conclusion, diabetes defined by the current criteria was predicted by the new diabetes risk scores with reasonable accuracy. Nonetheless, RSFull with a postchallenge glucose value performed superior to RS-2hPG and RSNI.

A new predictive tool for the early risk assessment of gestational diabetes mellitus.

AIMS: The Italian National Institute of Health has recently introduced a selective screening based on the risk profile of pregnant women, which while recommending against screening of women at low risk (LR) for GDM, it recommends an early test for women at high risk (HR) for GDM. Herein, we assessed the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of this screening and developed a new index that improves these requirements. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 3974 pregnant women. GDM was diagnosed with a 2h 75-g OGTT at 16-18 weeks (early test) or 24-28 weeks of gestation, according to the IADPSG guidelines. RESULTS: 55.6% of HR women had GDM, although only 38.4% underwent early screening. Among 2654 women at medium risk, 20.9% had GDM; paradoxically, among 770 LR women, that would not have been screened, 26.6% received a GDM diagnosis. Based on these unsatisfactory results, we elaborated the Capula's index, that reduced both screening tests (p<0.001) and potentially undetected GDM cases (p<0.001), and corrected the paradoxical prevalence estimates of GDM obtained with the current Italian guidelines. Also, Capula's index improved correlation of GDM risk profile with obstetric and neonatal adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Capula's index improves accuracy of selective screening for GDM.

Level of implementation of guidelines on screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes: A national survey.

AIMS: To describe the degree of diffusion and acceptance of national guideline on screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes (GDM) among Italian diabetes centers and to detect possible areas for benchmarking. METHODS: In 2013 the Italian Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group structured a national survey, focused on GDM screening and diagnostic procedures, that was administered to diabetologists. RESULTS: Overall, 122 diabetologists of 122 different diabetes centers (21.7% territorial, 78.3% hospital/University) completed the questionnaire. All respondents declared to execute a 75 g-oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) as diagnostic test. Almost one in five centers preferred a universal screening procedure, the others executing a selective risk factors-based screening. In patients at high risk for GDM the OGTT was performed at 16-18 weeks' gestation in 84.0% of the cases; only 6.5% of respondents preferred to execute it as soon as possible; and 9.5% used to wait until 24-28 weeks' gestation. In the case of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥ 5.1 mmol/l (92 mg/dl), two third of respondents used to proceed with the execution of the complete diagnostic OGTT, the others considering sufficient the FPG value for the diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Good level of reception of national recommendations was documented. The diagnostic procedure was generally accepted and applied. Some criticisms were specifically linked to the choice of universal or risk factor-based screening procedure, and to the right time for executing the OGTT in women at high risk.

Gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence: Effect of the laboratory analytical variation.

AIMS: To highlight the effect of laboratory analytic variation, assessed by glucose (a) total analytic laboratory error (TAEL) present in one index laboratory and (b) total recommended allowable error (TAEa) universally applicable to all laboratories, on the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). METHODS: 2337 pregnant women underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) for universal GDM screening. Since the true value of every laboratory result fluctuates within a range, the glucose TAEL and TAEa were used to define a lower and an upper diagnostic threshold (95% confidence interval, CI) for the three glucose OGTT cut-offs of the criteria of the American Diabetes Association, ADA (2003); the Canadian Diabetes Association, CDA (2013) and the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups, IADPSG (2010). RESULTS: For the ADA, CDA and IADPSG criteria, respectively, the GDM prevalence [95% CI, (glucose TAEL) (glucose TAEa)] was 13.3% [(8.0-21.8) (6.3-25.9)], 30% [(17.3-53.1) (14.3-61.3)] and 45.3% [(27.0-71.0) (22.3-79.2)]. Using the lower and higher assigned OGTT glucose thresholds for TAEL, respectively, among the different criteria, either 200 (8.6%)-601 (25.7%) additional or 122 (5.2%)-426 (18.3%) fewer women would be identified with GDM (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Independent of the diagnostic criteria, any reported GDM prevalence can potentially vary between one half to two times even for laboratories meeting recommended quality specifications. To avoid misclassifying women with GDM substantially, individual laboratories can significantly reduce this disparity by improving analytic performance. All physicians must ensure that their laboratory meets acceptable quality standards for optimal patient care.

[Resident Gynaecologists' Attitudes towards the Inclusion of the Screening for Gestational Diabetes into the Maternity Directive: A Qualitative Study]. / Die Aufnahme des Screenings auf Gestationsdiabetes mellitus in die Mutterschaftsrichtlinien aus Sicht niedergelassener Gynäkologen: Eine qualitative Studie.

BACKGROUND: In March 2012, the screening for gestational diabetes was included as a 2-step screening into the German maternity directive. However, up to now it is unclear what resident gynaecologists, who are affected directly by this change in the maternity directive, think about the inclusion of the screening and the kind of screening introduced. METHODS: In order to approach this topic from a scientific point of view, gynaecologists in the German cities Mannheim, Ludwigshafen, and Heidelberg were interviewed face-to-face using a semi-structured interview guide with open-ended questions (mean interview length: 33:12 min). The interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim (191 pages), coded by 2 independent reviewers, and analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The majority of the gynaecologists supported the introduction of the screening into the maternity directives. However, some gynaecologists felt that this amendment is not strong enough criticising the GCT with 50 g glucose. Many gynaecologists would prefer an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT, 75 g glucose). But there were also some gynaecologists who thought that the OGTT would strain pregnant women too much and thus deemed it unsuitable for a screening. Additionally, the gynaecologists named difficulties concerning the implementation of the test such as, for example, the non-availability of a ready-made glucose syrup for the GCT and the delayed introduction of billing codes. DISCUSSION: In the framework of this qualitative study, resident gynaecologists--the main actors in the conduct of the screening--had the possibility to offer their opinion on this current topic. The results provide a first insight into the conduct of the screening and may serve as a basis for larger, quantitative studies.

Gestational diabetes: differences between the current international diagnostic criteria and implications of switching to IADPSG.

AIMS: To highlight the differences between eight international expert panel diagnostic criteria (either current or outdated but in use) for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and implications of switching to the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criterion. METHODS: 2337 pregnant women underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test as part of a universal screening protocol. The GDM prevalence and number of women classified differently were compared between the criteria of the American Diabetes Association (2003); Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (1998); the Canadian Diabetes Association, CDA (2003 & 2013); the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (1996); IADPSG (2010); the New Zealand Society for the Study of Diabetes (2004) and the World Health Organization (1999). RESULTS: The prevalence varied from 9.2% to 45.3% with the different criteria. The IADPSG compared a) best with CDA 2013 [356(15.2%) women classified differently, (kappa, k=68.3%)] and b) worst with CDA 2003 [843 (36.1%) women classified differently, (k=21.8%)]; p<0.001.Switching to IADPSG from the original criteria would increase the prevalence 1.5-4.9 times. CONCLUSIONS: In 2015, the various international guidelines for GDM continue to show major discrepancies in the prevalence and the women classified dissimilarly. A consensus on a single global guideline would be a giant leap forward.

[Practical implementation of recommendations concerning diagnostic procedures in gestational diabetes]. / Praktyczna realizacja zalecen dotyczacych diagnostyki cukrzycy ciazowej.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with health consequences for both, the mother and her offspring. In Poland, the diagnosis of GDM is based on the recommendations of the Polish Gynecological Society (PTG) and is usually made by obstetricians. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess practical implementation of PTG standards of GDM screening and diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study group consisted of 351 pregnant women consulted by a diabetologist: 102 patients between 2008-2010 (PTG guidelines of 2005) and 249 patients between 2011-2013 (PTG guidelines of 2011). Data concerning diagnostic procedures performed by obstetricians--time of diagnostic tests, fasting glucose levels, oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) results, and GDM risk factors--were collected. Adherence to the diagnostic procedures was assessed. RESULTS: Adherence to the diagnostic guidelines for 2008-2010 was 42.2%. The most common errors were incorrect time of OGGT (36.4%) and wrong interpretation of glycaemia (34.1%). Between 2011-2013 incorrect diagnostic testing was detected in 78.3% of the affected women. The most common deviation was lack of OGTT at the beginning of pregnancy in women with GDM risk factors (91.3%). CONCLUSIONS: A considerable number of GDM women underwent incorrect diagnostic procedures. More precise description of GDM risk factors in PTG recommendations seems to be necessary.

Selective screening for GDM in Italy: application and effectiveness of National Guidelines.

In September 2011 the Italian Public Health Authority established selective screening for GDM to be performed based on the presence of risk factors. In a cohort of 2552 Caucasian pregnant women we evaluated to which extent the new national guidelines (NGL) are correctly applied; moreover we estimated the prevalence of GDM assessed by NGL. Our data show that the NGL are still properly implemented since the screening test was performed in nearly the totality of the women at 24th and 28th week of gestation. GDM prevalence is 10.9%, 25% greater as compared to the one determined with the old criteria 10 years ago.