Aims/hypothesisThe Di@bet.es Study is the first national study in Spain to examine the prevalence of diabetes and impaired glucose regulation.MethodsA population-based, cross-sectional, cluster sampling study was carried out, with target population being the entire Spanish population. Five thousand and seventy-two participants in 100 clusters (health centres or the equivalent in each region) were randomly selected with a probability proportional to population size. Participation rate was 55.8%. Study variables were a clinical and demographic structured survey, lifestyle survey, physical examination (weight, height, BMI, waist and hip circumference, blood pressure) and OGTT (75 g).ResultsAlmost 30% of the study population had some carbohydrate disturbance. The overall prevalence of diabetes mellitus adjusted for age and sex was 13.8% (95% CI 12.8, 14.7%), of which about half had unknown diabetes: 6.0% (95% CI 5.4, 6.7%). The age- and sex-adjusted prevalence rates of isolated impaired fasting glucose (IFG), isolated impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and combined IFG–IGT were 3.4% (95% CI 2.9, 4.0%), 9.2% (95% CI 8.2, 10.2%) and 2.2% (95% CI 1.7, 2.7%), respectively. The prevalence of diabetes and impaired glucose regulation increased significantly with age (p < 0.0001), and was higher in men than in women (p < 0.001).Conclusions/interpretationThe Di@bet.es Study shows, for the first time, the prevalence rates of diabetes and impaired glucose regulation in a representative sample of the Spanish population.

OBJECTIVE The use of the new International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria (IADPSGC) for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) results in an increased prevalence of GDM. Whether their introduction improves pregnancy outcomes has yet to be established. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of one-step IADPSGC for screening and diagnosis of GDM compared with traditional two-step Carpenter-Coustan (CC) criteria. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS GDM risk factors and pregnancy and newborn outcomes were prospectively assessed in 1,750 pregnant women from April 2011 to March 2012 using CC and in 1,526 pregnant women from April 2012 to March 2013 using IADPSGC between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation. Both groups received the same treatment and follow-up regimes. RESULTS The use of IADPSGC resulted in an important increase in GDM rate (35.5% vs. 10.6%) and an improvement in pregnancy outcomes, with a decrease in the rate of gestational hypertension (4.1 to 3.5%: −14.6%, P &lt; 0.021), prematurity (6.4 to 5.7%: −10.9%, P &lt; 0.039), cesarean section (25.4 to 19.7%: −23.9%, P &lt; 0.002), small for gestational age (7.7 to 7.1%: −6.5%, P &lt; 0.042), large for gestational age (4.6 to 3.7%: −20%, P &lt; 0.004), Apgar 1-min score &lt;7 (3.8 to 3.5%: −9%, P &lt; 0.015), and admission to neonatal intensive care unit (8.2 to 6.2%: −24.4%, P &lt; 0.001). Estimated cost savings was of €14,358.06 per 100 women evaluated using IADPSGC versus the group diagnosed using CC. CONCLUSIONS The application of the new IADPSGC was associated with a 3.5-fold increase in GDM prevalence in our study population, as well as significant improvements in pregnancy outcomes, and was cost-effective. Our results support their adoption.

BackgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) prevalence is increasing and becoming a major public health concern. Whether a Mediterranean diet can help prevent GDM in unselected pregnant women has yet to be studied.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the incidence of GDM with two different dietary models. All consecutive normoglycemic (<92 mg/dL) pregnant women at 8–12 gestational weeks (GW) were assigned to Intervention Group (IG, n = 500): MedDiet supplemented with extra virgin olive oil (EVOO) and pistachios; or Control Group (CG, n = 500): standard diet with limited fat intake. Primary outcome was to assess the effect of the intervention on GDM incidence at 24–28 GW. Gestational weight gain (GWG), pregnancy-induced hypertension, caesarean section (CS), preterm delivery, perineal trauma, small and large for gestational age (SGA and LGA) and admissions to neonatal intensive care unit were also assessed. Analysis was by intention-to-treat.ResultsA total of 874 women completed the study (440/434, CG/IG). According to nutritional questionnaires and biomarker analysis, women in the IG had a good adherence to the intervention. 177/874 women were diagnosed with GDM, 103/440 (23.4%) in CG and 74/434(17.1%) in IG, p = 0.012. The crude relative risk (RR) for GDM was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.56–0.95; p = 0.020) IG vs CG and persisted after adjusted multivariable analysis, 0.75(95% CI: 0.57–0.98; p = 0.039). IG had also significantly reduced rates of insulin-treated GDM, prematurity, GWG at 24–28 and 36–38 GW, emergency CS, perineal trauma, and SGA and LGA newborns (all p<0.05).ConclusionsAn early nutritional intervention with a supplemented MedDiet reduces the incidence of GDM and improves several maternal and neonatal outcomes.