Screening uptake rates and the clinical and cost effectiveness of screening for gestational diabetes mellitus in primary versus secondary care: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Trials

Fidelma P Dunne⁵  John Newell⁴  Brian E McGuire³  Liam G Glynn¹  Samuel Fanous⁵  Olga Tummon⁵  Paddy Gillespie²  Jennifer J Infanti⁵  Angela O’Dea⁵ 

[1] Discipline of General Practice, School of Medicine, 1 Distillery Road, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland;J.E. Cairnes School of Business & Economics, Cairnes Building, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland;School of Psychology, National University of Ireland Galway, University Road, Galway, Ireland;HRB Clinical Research Facility Galway, National University of Ireland Galway, University Road, Galway, Ireland;School of Medicine, Clinical Sciences Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland

关键词: Randomised controlled trial;    Secondary care;    Primary care;    Screening;    Gestational diabetes mellitus;   

Others  :  807624
DOI  :  10.1186/1745-6215-15-27

 received in 2013-10-10, accepted in 2014-01-07,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

The risks associated with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are well recognized, and there is increasing evidence to support treatment of the condition. However, clear guidance on the ideal approach to screening for GDM is lacking. Professional groups continue to debate whether selective screening (based on risk factors) or universal screening is the most appropriate approach. Additionally, there is ongoing debate about what levels of glucose abnormalities during pregnancy respond best to treatment and which maternal and neonatal outcomes benefit most from treatment. Furthermore, the implications of possible screening options on health care costs are not well established. In response to this uncertainty there have been repeated calls for well-designed, randomised trials to determine the efficacy of screening, diagnosis, and management plans for GDM. We describe a randomised controlled trial to investigate screening uptake rates and the clinical and cost effectiveness of screening in primary versus secondary care settings.

Methods/Design

This will be an unblinded, two-group, parallel randomised controlled trial (RCT). The target population includes 784 women presenting for their first antenatal visit at 12 to 18 weeks gestation at two hospitals in the west of Ireland: Galway University Hospital and Mayo General Hospital. Participants will be offered universal screening for GDM at 24 to 28 weeks gestation in either primary care (n = 392) or secondary care (n = 392) locations. The primary outcome variable is the uptake rate of screening. Secondary outcomes include indicators of clinical effectiveness of screening at each screening site (primary and secondary) including gestational week at time of screening, time to access antenatal diabetes services for women diagnosed with GDM, and pregnancy and neonatal outcomes for women with GDM. In addition, parallel economic and qualitative evaluations will be conducted. The trial will cover the period from the woman’s first hospital antenatal visit at 12 to 18 weeks gestation, until the completion of the pregnancy.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN02232125

【 授权许可】

   
2014 O’Dea et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]American Diabetes Association: Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 2006, 29:S43-S48.
• [2]Reece EA: The fetal and maternal consequences of gestational diabetes mellitus. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010, 3:199-203.
• [3]Metzger BE, Lowe LP, Dyer AR: Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 2008, 2008:1991-2002.
• [4]Vääräsmäki M, Pouta A, Elliot P, Tapanainen P, Sovio U, Ruokonen A, Hartikainen AL, McCarthy M, Järvelin MR: Adolescent manifestations of metabolic syndrome among children born to women with gestational diabetes in a general-population birth cohort. Am J Epidemiol 2009, 169:1209-1215.
• [5]Aberg A, Westbom L: Association between maternal pre-existing or gestational diabetes and health problems in children. Acta Paediatr 2001, 90:746-750.
• [6]Bellamy L, Casas J-P, Hingorani AD, Williams D: Type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2009, 373:1773-1779.
• [7]Metzger BE: Long-term outcomes in mothers diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus and their offspring. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2007, 50:972-979.
• [8]Crowther CA, Hiller JE, Moss JR, McPhee AJ, Jeffries WS, Robinson JS: Effect of treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus on pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 2005, 352:2477-2486.
• [9]Langer O, Yogev Y, Most O, Xenakis EM: Gestational diabetes: the consequences of not treating. Am J 0bstet Gyn 2005, 192:989-997.
• [10]Reece EA, Leguizamón G, Wiznitzer A: Gestational diabetes: the need for a common ground. Lancet 2009, 373:1789-1797.
• [11]National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): Diabetes in pregnancy: management of diabetes and its complications from pre-conception to the postnatal period. London: Clinical Guideline No 63; 2008.
• [12]Metzger BE: International association of diabetes and pregnancy study groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Care 2010, 33:676-682.
• [13]American Diabetes Association: Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 2009, 32(Suppl 1):S62-S67.
• [14]World Health Organisation: Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus and its Complications. Part 1. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus. Geneva: WHO; 1999.
• [15]Karagiannis T, Bekiari E, Manolopoulos K, Paletas K, Tsapas A: Gestational diabetes mellitus: why screen and how to diagnose. Hippokratia 2010, 14:151-154.
• [16]Lancet: The global challenge of diabetes. Lancet 2008, 371:1723.
• [17]O’Sullivan EP, Avalos G, O’Reilly M, Dennedy MC, Gaffney G, Dunne F: Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy (DIP): the prevalence and outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus using new diagnostic criteria. Diabetologia 2011, 54:1670-1675.
• [18]Alberti KGMM, Zimmet PZ: Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Provisional report of a WHO Consultation. Diabet Med 1998, 15:539-553.
• [19]American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: ACOG practice bulletin. Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. Number 30, September 2001 (replaces technical bulletin number 200, December 1994). Gestational diabetes. Obstet Gynecol 2001, 98:525-538.
• [20]Griffin M, Coffey M, Johnson H, Scanlon P, Foley M, Stronge J, O’Meara N, Firth R: Universal vs. risk factor‒based screening for gestational diabetes mellitus: detection rates, gestation at diagnosis and outcome. Diabet Med 2000, 17:26-32.
• [21]Cosson E, Benchimol M, Carbillon L, Pharisien I, Pariès J, Valensi P, Lormeau B, Bolie S, Uzan M, Attali JR: Universal rather than selective screening for gestational diabetes mellitus may improve fetal outcomes. Diabetes Metab 2006, 32:140-146.
• [22]Tieu J, Middleton P, McPhee AJ, Crowther CA: Screening and subsequent management for gestational diabetes for improving maternal and infant health. The Cochrane Database of Syst Rev 2010., 7CD007222
• [23]Cullinan J, Gillespie P, Owens L, Dunne F: Accessibility and screening uptake rates for gestational diabetes mellitus in Ireland. Health Place 2012, 18:339-348.
• [24]Garner P, Okun N, Keely E, Wells G, Perkins S, Sylvain J, Belcher J: A randomized controlled trial of strict glycemic control and tertiary level obstetric care versus routine obstetric care in the management of gestational diabetes: a pilot study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997, 177:190-195.
• [25]Bancroft K, Tuffnell D, Mason G, Rogerson L, Mansfield M: A randomised controlled pilot study of the management of gestational impaired glucose tolerance. BJOG 2000, 107:959-963.
• [26]Tuffnell DJ, West J, Walkinshaw SA: Treatments for gestational diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance in pregnancy. The Cochrane Database of Syst Rev 2003., 3CD003395
• [27]Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, Carpenter MW, Ramin SM, Casey B, Wapner RJ, Varner MW, Rouse DJ, Thorp JM Jr: A multicenter, randomized trial of treatment for mild gestational diabetes. N Engl J Med 2009, 361:1339-1348.
• [28]Horvath K, Koch K, Jeitler K, Matyas E, Bender R, Bastian H, Lange S, Siebenhofer A: Effects of treatment in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2010. doi:10.1136/bmj.c1395
• [29]Alwan N, Tuffnell DJ, West J: Treatments for gestational diabetes. The Cochrane Database of Syst Rev 2009., 3CD003395
• [30]Falavigna M, Schmidt MI, Trujillo J, Alves LF, Wendland ER, Torloni MR, Colagiuri S, Duncan BB: Effectiveness of gestational diabetes treatment: a systematic review with quality of evidence assessment. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2012, 98:396-405.
• [31]Landon MB: Is there a benefit to the treatment of mild gestational diabetes mellitus? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010, 202:649-653.
• [32]Danilenko-Dixon DR, Van Winter JT, Nelson RL, Ogburn PL: Universal versus selective gestational diabetes screening: application of 1997 American Diabetes Association recommendations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999, 181:798-802.
• [33]Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG: CONSORT Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clinical Epidemiol 2010, 2010(63):e1-e37.
• [34]Kavanagh K, O’Brien N, Glynn L, Vellinga A, Murphy A: WestREN: a description of an Irish academic general practice research network. BMC Fam Pract 2010, 11:74. BioMed Central Full Text
• [35]IADPSG: International association of diabetes and pregnancy study groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Care 2010, 33:676-682.
• [36]Health Information Quality Assessment (HIQA): Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in Ireland. http://www.hiqa.ie/publication/guidelines-economic-evaluation-health-technologies-ireland webcite