The risk stratification of adverse neonatal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes (STRONG) study

Aims: To assess the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes (GDM) by identifying subgroups of women at higher risk to recognize the characteristics most associated with an excess of risk. Methods: Observational, retrospective, multicenter study involving consecutive women with GDM. To identify distinct and homogeneous subgroups of women at a higher risk, the RECursive Partitioning and AMalgamation (RECPAM) method was used. Overall, 2736 pregnancies complicated by GDM were analyzed. The main outcome measure was the occurrence of adverse neonatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by GDM. Results: Among study participants (median age 36.8 years, pre-gestational BMI 24.8 kg/m2), six miscarriages, one neonatal death, but no maternal death was recorded. The occurrence of the cumulative adverse outcome (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.59–3.87), large for gestational age (OR 3.99, 95% CI 2.40–6.63), fetal malformation (OR 2.66, 95% CI 1.00–7.18), and respiratory distress (OR 4.33, 95% CI 1.33–14.12) was associated with previous macrosomia. Large for gestational age was also associated with obesity (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.00–2.15). Small for gestational age was associated with first trimester glucose levels (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.04–3.69). Neonatal hypoglycemia was associated with overweight (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.27) and obesity (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.04–2.51). The RECPAM analysis identified high-risk subgroups mainly characterized by high pre-pregnancy BMI (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.21–2.33 for obese; OR 1.38 95% CI 1.03–1.87 for overweight). Conclusions: A deep investigation on the factors associated with adverse neonatal outcomes requires a risk stratification. In particular, great attention must be paid to the prevention and treatment of obesity

Management of gestational diabetes mellitus.

The incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is on the increase and, if not diagnosed, managed and treated adequately, can have unfavorable maternal and fetal outcomes. Several studies have shown that glycemic values considered as adequate in the past when monitoring GDM failed to contain these adverse outcomes and randomized trials are needed to ascertain whether these targets should be lowered. Dietary restrictions remain the mainstay of GDM management and suitable physical exercise can help too. The use of rapid-acting insulin analogues (lispro and aspart) are novel treatments for improving metabolic control by reducing postprandial glycemia, while long-acting insulin analogues need to be evaluated by further studies for safety in clinical use before they can be prescribed. Numerous studies have found glyburide and metformin safe in women with GDM but more randomized controlled trials are needed, with a long-term follow-up of mother and child, to confirm these results

Prepregnancy BMI influences maternal and fetal outcomes in women with isolated gestational hyperglycaemia: a multicentre study

This multicentre study analyzed the maternal and fetal outcomes of women who had one elevated 3-h oral glucose tolerance test (isolated gestational hyperglycaemia [IGH])

Diabetic pregnancy outcomes in mothers treated with basal insulin lispro protamine suspension or NPH insulin: a multicenter retrospective Italian study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to study the efficacy and safety of long-acting insulin analog insulin lispro protamine suspension (ILPS) in diabetic pregnant women. METHODS: In a multicenter observational retrospective study, we evaluated pregnancy outcome in 119 women affected by type 1 diabetes and 814 with gestational diabetes (GDM) treated during pregnancy with ILPS, compared with a control group treated with neutral protamine hagedorn (NPH) insulin. RESULTS: Among type 1 diabetic patients, fasting blood glucose at the end of pregnancy was significantly lower in ILPS-treated than in NPH-treated patients. HbA1c levels across pregnancy did not differ between groups. Caesarean section and preterm delivery rates were significantly lower in the ILPS-women. Fetal outcomes were similar in the ILPS and NPH groups. Among GDM women, fasting blood glucose at the end of pregnancy was significantly lower in ILPS-treated than in NPH-treated patients. Duration of gestation was significantly longer, caesarian section and preterm delivery rates were lower in the ILPS-treated group. In addition, there were significantly fewer babies with an excessive ponderal index or neonatal hypoglycemic episodes in the ILPS group than in the NPH group. CONCLUSIONS: Association of ILPS with rapid-acting analogs in pregnancy is safe in terms of maternal and fetal outcomes

Is a motivational interviewing based lifestyle intervention for obese pregnant women across Europe implemented as planned? Process evaluation of the DALI study

Background Process evaluation is an essential part of designing and assessing complex interventions. The vitamin D and lifestyle intervention study (DALI) study is testing different strategies to prevent development of gestational diabetes mellitus among European obese pregnant women with a body mass index ≥29 kg/m2. The intervention includes guidance on physical activity and/or healthy eating by a lifestyle coach trained in motivational interviewing (MI). The aim of this study was to assess the process elements: reach, dose delivered, fidelity and satisfaction and to investigate whether these process elements were associated with changes in gestational weight gain (GWG). Methods Data on reach, dose delivered, fidelity, and satisfaction among 144 participants were collected. Weekly recruitment reports, notes from meetings, coach logs and evaluation questionnaires (n = 110) were consulted. Fidelity of eight (out of twelve) lifestyle coach practitioners was assessed by analysing audio recorded counselling sessions using the MI treatment integrity scale. Furthermore, associations between process elements and GWG were assessed with linear regression analyses. Results A total of 20% of the possible study population (reach) was included in this analysis. On average 4.0 (of the intended 5) face-to-face sessions were delivered. Mean MI fidelity almost reached ‘expert opinion’ threshold for the global scores, but was below ‘beginning proficiency’ for the behavioural counts. High variability in quality of MI between practitioners was identified. Participants were highly satisfied with the intervention, the lifestyle coach and the intervention materials. No significant associations were found between process elements and GWG. Conclusion Overall, the intervention was well delivered and received by the study population, but did not comply with all the principles of MI. Ensuring audio recording of lifestyle sessions throughout the study would facilitate provision of individualized feedback to improve MI skills. A larger sample size is needed to confirm the lack of association between process elements and GWG.</p

Cost-Effectiveness of Lifestyle Counselling as Primary Prevention of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Findings from a Cluster-Randomised Trial

AIMS: The aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of primary prevention of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) through intensified counselling on physical activity, diet, and appropriate weight gain among the risk group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cost-effectiveness analysis was based on data from a cluster-randomised controlled GDM prevention trial carried out in primary health-care maternity clinics in Finland. Women (n = 399) with at least one risk factor for GDM were included. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated in terms of birth weight, 15D, and perceived health as measured with a visual analogue scale (VAS). A bootstrap technique for cluster-randomised samples was used to estimate uncertainty around a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. RESULTS: The mean total cost in the intervention group was €7,763 (standard deviation (SD): €4,511) and in the usual-care group was €6,994 (SD: €4,326, p = 0.14). The mean intervention cost was €141. The difference for costs in the birth-weight group was €753 (95% CI: -250 to 1,818) and in effects for birth weight was 115 g (95% CI: 15 to 222). The ICER for birth weight was almost €7, with 86.7% of bootstrap pairs located in the north-east quadrant, indicating that the intervention was more effective and more expensive in birth weight terms than the usual care was. The data show an 86.7% probability that each gram of birth weight avoided requires an additional cost of €7. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention was effective for birth weight but was not cost-effective for birth weight, 15D, or VAS when compared to the usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 33885819