The impact of adoption of the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group criteria for the screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes

Mayo, Karli; Melamed, Nir; Vandenberghe, Hilde; Berger, Howard

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2014.08.027

Cited by 101 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In retrospective reviews comparing the IADPSG criteria (as it was then known) with other criteria (Carpenter and Coustan, Canadian Diabetes Association) in Caucasian populations, there was an increase in the prevalence of GDM but better pregnancy outcomes and no increase in the rate of caesarean sections. 16,17 The St Carlos Gestational Diabetes Study 18 was a prospective analysis of the new criteria related to both health and economic outcomes. The new criteria diagnosed a significantly higher number of women with GDM but were associated with improvements in pregnancy outcomes and markedly reduced healthcare costs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy in Australia

Moses

Wong

Lambert

et al. 2016

Aust NZ J Obst Gynaeco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS) has recently endorsed the World Health Organization (WHO) terminology and classification of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy. The prevalence is likely to increase, but no prospective data are available for a representative Australian population. Aims: To determine the prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy (HIP) using results from both the public and private sectors in a population that has a similar ethnicity to the overall Australian population. Material and Methods:The results of all pregnancy oral glucose tolerance tests (POGTT) in the public sector and by a dominant private pathology provider in a major city have been prospectively collected for a three-year period and analysed using the ADIPS (WHO) criteria. Results: The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy (HIP) was 13.1% with diabetes mellitus in pregnancy (DIP) being 0.4% and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) being 12.7%. Conclusion:The new criteria will diagnose about one-third more women with GDM than the previous ADIPS criteria. This will have resource and health implications. Focussed local health economic data will be important.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy in Australia

Moses

Wong

Lambert

et al. 2016

Aust NZ J Obst Gynaeco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data comparing population-wide outcomes with one-step versus two-step approaches have been inconsistent to date (64,65). In addition, pregnancies complicated by GDM per the IADPSG criteria, but not recognized as such, have comparable outcomes to pregnancies diagnosed as GDM by the more stringent two-step criteria (66,67). There remains strong consensus that establishing a uniform approach to diagnosing GDM will benefit patients, caregivers, and policymakers.…”

Section: Future Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes

2016

Diabetes Care

1,394

600

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Data comparing population-wide outcomes with one-step versus two-step approaches have been inconsistent to date (78,79). In addition, pregnancies complicated by GDM per the IADPSG criteria, but not recognized as such, have comparable outcomes to pregnancies diagnosed as GDM by the more stringent two-step criteria (80,81). There remains strong consensus that establishing a uniform approach to diagnosing GDM will benefit patients, caregivers, and policy makers.…”

Section: Future Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes:Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2018

2017

Diabetes Care

2,637

1,223

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes” includes ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

show abstract

The impact of adoption of the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group criteria for the screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes

Cited by 101 publications

References 14 publications

The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy in Australia

The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy in Australia

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes

2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes:Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2018

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About