257: Gestational diabetes screening with the new IADPSG 2 hour glucose tolerance test vs the 1 hour glucose challenge test: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Mission, John; Ohno, Mika; Yanit, Keenan; Cheng, Yin Cheong; Caughey, Aaron B.

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2011.10.275

Cited by 2 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 45 In terms of economic evaluation, five of the publications were from a healthcare perspective (third-party payer), 11 , 38 , 40 , 41 , 43 one was from the payers’ perspective, 39 and two were from a societal perspective. 42 , 44 The remaining three studies did not clarify their perspective. 36 , 37 , 45 One study was supported by a pharmaceutical company (Novo Nordisk), 36 , 37 one failed to mention any funding, 42 and the others were supported by public funding.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“… 42 , 44 The remaining three studies did not clarify their perspective. 36 , 37 , 45 One study was supported by a pharmaceutical company (Novo Nordisk), 36 , 37 one failed to mention any funding, 42 and the others were supported by public funding.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Four of the included studies 39 , 41 , 42 , 45 used TreeAge and three used Microsoft Excel 37 , 40 , 43 to construct a decision tree for their economic model. Their general characteristics are summarized in Table 2 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 44 The remaining eight studies were published between 2011 and 2017. 11 , 36 – 43 Four evaluations were from the United States, 36 , 41 , 42 , 44 three were from Europe (United Kingdom, 38 Ireland, 11 and France 45 ), one was from New Zealand, 40 and the remaining two were from Asia (Singapore, 39 India, and Israel 36 , 37 ). Most of the studies used cost-utility analysis (CUA), where utility is measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) or disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 11 Two studies projected the long-term impact of screening on diabetes prevention. 36 , 37 , 41 Most studies used the diagnostic criteria of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) released in 2010 11 , 36 , 37 , 39 – 42 or Carpenter and Coustan (CC) 41 , 45 ; one used the 2008 guidelines of National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) 43 ; and one compared different diagnostic thresholds (NICE guidelines of 2015 and IADPSG). 38 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Economic Evaluations of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Screening: A Systematic Review

Tobe

Takahashi

et al. 2021

Journal of Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aims to find evidence of the cost-effectiveness of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) screening and assess the quality of current economic evaluations, which have shown different conclusions with a variation in screening methods, data sources, outcome indicators, and implementation in diverse organizational contexts. Methods Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Health Technology Assessment, database, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database databases were searched through June 2019. Studies on economic evaluation reporting both cost and health outcomes of GDM screening programs in English language were selected, and the quality of the studies was assessed using Drummond’s checklist. The general characteristics, main assumptions, and results of the economic evaluations were summarized. Results Our search yielded 10 eligible economic evaluations with different screening strategies compared in different settings and perspectives. The selected papers scored 81% (68–97%) on the items in Drummond’s checklist on average. In general, a screening program is cost-effective or even dominant over no screening. The one-step screening, with more cases detected, is more likely to be cost-effective than the two-step screening. Universal screening is more likely to be cost-effective than screening targeting the high-risk population. Parameters affecting cost-effectiveness include: diagnosis criteria, epidemiological characteristics of the population, efficacy of screening and treatment, and costs. Conclusions Most studies found GDM screening to be cost-effective, though uncertainties remain due to many factors. The quality assessment identified weaknesses in the economic evaluations in terms of integrating existing data, measuring costs and consequences, analyzing perspectives, and adjusting for uncertainties.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Economic Evaluations of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Screening: A Systematic Review

Tobe

Takahashi

et al. 2021

Journal of Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Gestational diabetes among Saudi women: prevalence, risk factors and pregnancy outcomes

Alfadhli

Osman

Basri

et al. 2015

Annals of Saudi Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVESThe prevalence of gestational diabetes (GDM) has increased recently worldwide, mainly due to adoption of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) criteria. The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence of GDM in Saudi women and to assess risk factors and pregnancy outcomes using the IADPSG criteria.DESIGN AND SETTINGA prospective descriptive study of pregnant Saudi women presenting at the Maternity and Children Hospital, Medina, Saudi Arabia, between October 2011 and June 2014.METHODSFasting plasma glucose, glycated hemoglobin, and random plasma glucose concentrations were obtained for all participants at the first antenatal visit. In women with normal results, screening for GDM was performed at 24 to 28 weeks of gestation, with a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Women who had GDM were treated with diet, exercise, and insulin as needed. Pregnancy outcomes were recorded after delivery. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess possible risk factors for GDM.RESULTSEarly screenings showed abnormal glucose in 211 of 954 women (22.1%). In 445 women, the OGTT showed GDM in 183 women (39.4%). GDM cases identified by OGTT and by early screening increased the rate of GDM to 51% (292 women). Older maternal age, higher body mass index, higher blood pressure, past GDM, history of delivering a malformed child, and family history of diabetes were the main risk factors for GDM. GDM increased the risk of neonatal hypoglycemia (OR 9.353), low Apgar score (OR 5.546), and induction of labor (OR 2.33). The newborns of GDM mothers had a higher birth weight: 3043 g vs. 2890 g in the non-GDM group (P=.004). Other maternal and neonatal outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups.CONCLUSIONThe prevalence of GDM is high among Saudi women. Timely and effective treatment reduces perinatal morbidity and improves outcomes.

show abstract

257: Gestational diabetes screening with the new IADPSG 2 hour glucose tolerance test vs the 1 hour glucose challenge test: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Economic Evaluations of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Screening: A Systematic Review

Economic Evaluations of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Screening: A Systematic Review

Gestational diabetes among Saudi women: prevalence, risk factors and pregnancy outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About