Author: Todi, Sushila; Sagili, Haritha; Kamalanathan, Sadish Kumar
Title: Comparison of criteria of International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus. Cord-id: 9ejjagxp Document date: 2020_5_9
ID: 9ejjagxp
Snippet: BACKGROUND Different screening procedures and diagnostic criteria are being followed in the same as well as in different countries with no single standard criteria established for diagnosis of GDM. So far, there are no studies in the Indian population comparing IADPSG with NICE criteria. OBJECTIVE To compare International Association of Pregnancy and Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus and
Document: BACKGROUND Different screening procedures and diagnostic criteria are being followed in the same as well as in different countries with no single standard criteria established for diagnosis of GDM. So far, there are no studies in the Indian population comparing IADPSG with NICE criteria. OBJECTIVE To compare International Association of Pregnancy and Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus and its influence on maternal and perinatal outcomes. METHOD This prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of a tertiary care institute in South India from March 2017 to October 2018. Six-hundred and eighty women with or without risk factors for GDM were recruited in the study and screened for GDM based on IADPSG and NICE criteria. Women with preexisting diabetes mellitus or with fasting plasma glucose ≥ 126 mg/dl were excluded. RESULTS The overall prevalence of GDM in our study was 27.2% by either IADPSG/NICE criteria. In this study, 25.1% women and 11.6% women were diagnosed as GDM using IADPSG and NICE criteria, respectively. The level of agreement between the two diagnostic criteria was found to be poor in our study and was statistically significant (kappa = 0.429, p < 0.001). Women testing IADPSG-positive NICE-negative had a higher risk of GHTN, abortions, PROM, preterm delivery, caesarean section and congenital anomalies, meconium-stained liquor, and low Apgar scores at 1 min when compared to non GDM group. In addition, except for preterm delivery, women diagnosed as GDM by both IADPSG and NICE criteria had adverse outcomes such as preeclampsia, urinary tract infection, and polyhydramnios. Women diagnosed as GDM in IADPSG-negative NICE-positive had no significant adverse maternal or perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS IADPSG criteria appear to be more robust than NICE criteria for diagnosis of GDM. Women with substantial risk of maternal and perinatal outcomes are better identified by IADPSG criteria who would have been missed if NICE criteria was used.
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- Try single phrases listed below for: 1
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date