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

被引:9
作者
O'Dea, Angela [1 ]
Infanti, Jennifer J. [1 ]
Gillespie, Paddy [2 ]
Tummon, Olga [1 ]
Fanous, Samuel [1 ]
Glynn, Liam G. [3 ]
McGuire, Brian E. [4 ]
Newell, John [5 ]
Dunne, Fidelma P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Univ Ireland Galway, Sch Med, Inst Clin Sci, Galway, Ireland
[2] Natl Univ Ireland Galway, JE Cairnes Sch Business & Econ, Galway, Ireland
[3] Natl Univ Ireland Galway, Sch Med, Discipline Gen Practice, Galway, Ireland
[4] Natl Univ Ireland Galway, Sch Psychol, Galway, Ireland
[5] Natl Univ Ireland Galway, HRB Clin Res Facil Galway, Galway, Ireland
关键词
Gestational diabetes mellitus; Screening; Primary care; Secondary care; Randomised controlled trial; PREGNANCY; ASSOCIATION; UNIVERSAL; DIAGNOSIS; CLASSIFICATION; HYPERGLYCEMIA; CONSEQUENCES; MANAGEMENT; OUTCOMES; FETAL;
D O I
10.1186/1745-6215-15-27
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
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.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 35 条
  • [11] Type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Bellamy, Leanne
    Casas, Juan-Pablo
    Hingorani, Aroon D.
    Williams, David
    [J]. LANCET, 2009, 373 (9677) : 1773 - 1779
  • [12] Universal rather than selective screening for gestational diabetes mellitus may improve fetal outcomes
    Cosson, E
    Benchimol, M
    Carbillon, L
    Pharisien, I
    Pariès, J
    Valensi, P
    Lormeau, B
    Bolie, S
    Uzan, M
    Attali, JR
    [J]. DIABETES & METABOLISM, 2006, 32 (02) : 140 - 146
  • [13] Effect of treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus on pregnancy outcomes
    Crowther, CA
    Hiller, JE
    Moss, JR
    McPhee, AJ
    Jeffries, WS
    Robinson, JS
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2005, 352 (24) : 2477 - 2486
  • [14] Accessibility and screening uptake rates for gestational diabetes mellitus in Ireland
    Cullinan, John
    Gillespie, Paddy
    Owens, Lisa
    Dunne, Fidelma
    [J]. HEALTH & PLACE, 2012, 18 (02) : 339 - 348
  • [15] Universal versus selective gestational diabetes screening: Application of 1997 American Diabetes Association recommendations
    Danilenko-Dixon, DR
    Van Winter, JT
    Nelson, RL
    Ogburn, PL
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1999, 181 (04) : 798 - 802
  • [16] Effectiveness of gestational diabetes treatment: A systematic review with quality of evidence assessment
    Falavigna, Maicon
    Schmidt, Maria I.
    Trujillo, Janet
    Alves, Luisia F.
    Wendland, Eliana R.
    Torloni, Maria R.
    Colagiuri, Stephen
    Duncan, Bruce B.
    [J]. DIABETES RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2012, 98 (03) : 396 - 405
  • [17] 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
    Garner, P
    Okun, N
    Keely, E
    Wells, G
    Perkins, S
    Sylvain, J
    Belcher, J
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1997, 177 (01) : 190 - 195
  • [18] Universal vs. risk factor-based screening for gestational diabetes mellitus: detection rates, gestation at diagnosis and outcome
    Griffin, ME
    Coffey, M
    Johnson, H
    Scanlon, P
    Foley, M
    Stronge, J
    O'Meara, NM
    Firth, RG
    [J]. DIABETIC MEDICINE, 2000, 17 (01) : 26 - 32
  • [19] Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA), GUID EC EV HLTH TECH
  • [20] Effects of treatment in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis
    Horvath, Karl
    Koch, Klaus
    Jeitler, Klaus
    Matyas, Eva
    Bender, Ralf
    Bastian, Hilda
    Lange, Stefan
    Siebenhofer, Andrea
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2010, 340 : 796