Risk factor screening for abnormal glucose tolerance in pregnancy

Khadijah Shamsuddin, Zaleha Abdullah Mahdy, I. Siti Rafiaah, M. A. Jamil, M. D. Rahimah

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the prevalence and association of frequently used screening risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to compare the validity and cost of universal screening with risk factor screening. Method: A cross-sectional survey of 768 pregnant women at ≥ 24 weeks' gestation who were attending the antenatal clinic at the Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (HUKM) was made. Risk factors were determined using a questionnaire. An abnormal oral glucose tolerance test was defined as a 2-h post-prandial blood sugar level of ≥ 7.8 mmol/l. Results: A total of 191 pregnant mothers (24.9%) had GDM. The most commonly identified screening factors were positive family history of diabetes mellitus (31.4%), history of spontaneous abortion (17.8%), vaginal discharge and pruritis vulvae in current pregnancy (16.0%), and maternal age greater than 35 years (14.7%). Five hundred and thirteen mothers (66.8%) had at least one risk factor. All screening risk factors, except past history of diabetes mellitus in previous pregnancy and maternal age, were not significantly associated with abnormal glucose tolerance (GT). Risk factor screening gave a sensitivity of 72.2% and a specificity of 35.0%. Universal screening would cost RM 12.06 while traditional risk factor screening would cost RM 11.15 per identified case and will have missed 53 of the 191 cases. Conclusions: Risk factor screening scored poorly in predicting GDM. Cost analysis of universal compared with traditional risk factor screening showed a negligible difference. Thus universal screening appears to be the most reliable method of diagnosing GDM.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)27-32
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics
Volume75
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2001

Fingerprint

Glucose
Pregnancy
Gestational Diabetes
Costs and Cost Analysis
Maternal Age
Diabetes Mellitus
Mothers
Vaginal Discharge
Vulva
Malaysia
Spontaneous Abortion
Pruritus
Glucose Tolerance Test
Meals
Blood Glucose
Pregnant Women
Cross-Sectional Studies

Keywords

  • Cost analysis
  • Gestational diabetes mellitus
  • Risk factors
  • Screening
  • Validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Cite this

Risk factor screening for abnormal glucose tolerance in pregnancy. / Shamsuddin, Khadijah; Abdullah Mahdy, Zaleha; Rafiaah, I. Siti; Jamil, M. A.; Rahimah, M. D.

In: International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Vol. 75, No. 1, 2001, p. 27-32.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8d5e563a637745c9b6ff7f2f063bd50a,
title = "Risk factor screening for abnormal glucose tolerance in pregnancy",
abstract = "Objectives: To assess the prevalence and association of frequently used screening risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to compare the validity and cost of universal screening with risk factor screening. Method: A cross-sectional survey of 768 pregnant women at ≥ 24 weeks' gestation who were attending the antenatal clinic at the Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (HUKM) was made. Risk factors were determined using a questionnaire. An abnormal oral glucose tolerance test was defined as a 2-h post-prandial blood sugar level of ≥ 7.8 mmol/l. Results: A total of 191 pregnant mothers (24.9{\%}) had GDM. The most commonly identified screening factors were positive family history of diabetes mellitus (31.4{\%}), history of spontaneous abortion (17.8{\%}), vaginal discharge and pruritis vulvae in current pregnancy (16.0{\%}), and maternal age greater than 35 years (14.7{\%}). Five hundred and thirteen mothers (66.8{\%}) had at least one risk factor. All screening risk factors, except past history of diabetes mellitus in previous pregnancy and maternal age, were not significantly associated with abnormal glucose tolerance (GT). Risk factor screening gave a sensitivity of 72.2{\%} and a specificity of 35.0{\%}. Universal screening would cost RM 12.06 while traditional risk factor screening would cost RM 11.15 per identified case and will have missed 53 of the 191 cases. Conclusions: Risk factor screening scored poorly in predicting GDM. Cost analysis of universal compared with traditional risk factor screening showed a negligible difference. Thus universal screening appears to be the most reliable method of diagnosing GDM.",
keywords = "Cost analysis, Gestational diabetes mellitus, Risk factors, Screening, Validity",
author = "Khadijah Shamsuddin and {Abdullah Mahdy}, Zaleha and Rafiaah, {I. Siti} and Jamil, {M. A.} and Rahimah, {M. D.}",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1016/S0020-7292(01)00468-4",
language = "English",
volume = "75",
pages = "27--32",
journal = "International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics",
issn = "0020-7292",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk factor screening for abnormal glucose tolerance in pregnancy

AU - Shamsuddin, Khadijah

AU - Abdullah Mahdy, Zaleha

AU - Rafiaah, I. Siti

AU - Jamil, M. A.

AU - Rahimah, M. D.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Objectives: To assess the prevalence and association of frequently used screening risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to compare the validity and cost of universal screening with risk factor screening. Method: A cross-sectional survey of 768 pregnant women at ≥ 24 weeks' gestation who were attending the antenatal clinic at the Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (HUKM) was made. Risk factors were determined using a questionnaire. An abnormal oral glucose tolerance test was defined as a 2-h post-prandial blood sugar level of ≥ 7.8 mmol/l. Results: A total of 191 pregnant mothers (24.9%) had GDM. The most commonly identified screening factors were positive family history of diabetes mellitus (31.4%), history of spontaneous abortion (17.8%), vaginal discharge and pruritis vulvae in current pregnancy (16.0%), and maternal age greater than 35 years (14.7%). Five hundred and thirteen mothers (66.8%) had at least one risk factor. All screening risk factors, except past history of diabetes mellitus in previous pregnancy and maternal age, were not significantly associated with abnormal glucose tolerance (GT). Risk factor screening gave a sensitivity of 72.2% and a specificity of 35.0%. Universal screening would cost RM 12.06 while traditional risk factor screening would cost RM 11.15 per identified case and will have missed 53 of the 191 cases. Conclusions: Risk factor screening scored poorly in predicting GDM. Cost analysis of universal compared with traditional risk factor screening showed a negligible difference. Thus universal screening appears to be the most reliable method of diagnosing GDM.

AB - Objectives: To assess the prevalence and association of frequently used screening risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to compare the validity and cost of universal screening with risk factor screening. Method: A cross-sectional survey of 768 pregnant women at ≥ 24 weeks' gestation who were attending the antenatal clinic at the Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (HUKM) was made. Risk factors were determined using a questionnaire. An abnormal oral glucose tolerance test was defined as a 2-h post-prandial blood sugar level of ≥ 7.8 mmol/l. Results: A total of 191 pregnant mothers (24.9%) had GDM. The most commonly identified screening factors were positive family history of diabetes mellitus (31.4%), history of spontaneous abortion (17.8%), vaginal discharge and pruritis vulvae in current pregnancy (16.0%), and maternal age greater than 35 years (14.7%). Five hundred and thirteen mothers (66.8%) had at least one risk factor. All screening risk factors, except past history of diabetes mellitus in previous pregnancy and maternal age, were not significantly associated with abnormal glucose tolerance (GT). Risk factor screening gave a sensitivity of 72.2% and a specificity of 35.0%. Universal screening would cost RM 12.06 while traditional risk factor screening would cost RM 11.15 per identified case and will have missed 53 of the 191 cases. Conclusions: Risk factor screening scored poorly in predicting GDM. Cost analysis of universal compared with traditional risk factor screening showed a negligible difference. Thus universal screening appears to be the most reliable method of diagnosing GDM.

KW - Cost analysis

KW - Gestational diabetes mellitus

KW - Risk factors

KW - Screening

KW - Validity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035708009&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035708009&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0020-7292(01)00468-4

DO - 10.1016/S0020-7292(01)00468-4

M3 - Article

VL - 75

SP - 27

EP - 32

JO - International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics

JF - International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics

SN - 0020-7292

IS - 1

ER -