An assessment of the international association of diabetes in pregnancy study group (IADPSG) criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus

2011 ◽  
Vol 96 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. Fa110-Fa110
Author(s):  
L. J. Edwards ◽  
M. Ghosh ◽  
D. Churchill ◽  
A. Viswanath
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Gestational Diabetes ◽  
Gestational Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
International Association ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Diabetes In Pregnancy ◽  
Iadpsg Criteria ◽  
In Pregnancy

scholarly journals Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus using IADPSG and DIPSI criteria: a cross-sectional study

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 2408
Author(s):  
Trupti C. Ruge ◽  
Nisha Kanchana
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Gestational Diabetes ◽  
Gestational Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
International Association ◽  
Clinical Equipoise ◽  
Kappa Statistics ◽  
Diabetes In Pregnancy ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Iadpsg Criteria ◽  
In Pregnancy

Background: Considering the magnitude of adverse pregnancy outcomes related to gestational diabetes, the present study was undertaken to find out the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus using the international association of diabetes in pregnancy study groups criteria (IADPSG) and diabetes in pregnancy study group India (DIPSI) criteria to ascertain whether the present practice of diagnosing GDM by the guidelines recommended by DIPSI 21 based on WHO criterion of 2-h PG ≥140 mg/dL can still be followed in this study settings or adopt IADPSG recommendation.Methods: This study was done at Antenatal Clinic, department of obstetrics and gynecology, KLES Dr Prabhakar Kore Hospital, Belgaum from January 2013 to December 2013. A total of 225 pregnant women between 24 to 28 weeks gestations were studied. Diagnosis and the prevalence of GDM were assessed by applying both DIPSI and IADPSG criteria.Results: Most of the women (58.11%) were between 22 to 25 years and the mean age was 23.78±3.38 years. Based on the IADPSG criteria, the prevalence of GDM was 19.11% and by applying DIPSI criteria, prevalence of GDM was 16.89%. The difference in diagnostic capability between IADPSG and DIPSI was found to be 2.8% and the kappa statistics showed good strength of agreement between the two tests (p>0.302; Kappa=0.774).Conclusions: It was concluded that, the diagnosis GDM based on DIPSI is as effective as IADPSG criteria. Further, in resource poor countries like India, DIPSI procedure would be used with an advantage of being less costly and without compromising the clinical equipoise. 

scholarly journals Evaluation of “Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group of India” (DIPSI) Criterion as a Diagnostic Test for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Aradhana Singh ◽  
Raj K Singh ◽  
Vani Aditya
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Gestational Diabetes ◽  
Gestational Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Antenatal Clinic ◽  
Oral Glucose ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Diabetes In Pregnancy ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Capillary Glucose ◽  
In Pregnancy

Introduction: In view of the alarmingly increasing incidence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM), worldwide, as well as in India, a consensus to bring about standardization for diagnosis of GDM is needed. Internationally, the WHO 2013 criteria is being widely used, while (Diabetes In Pregnancy Study Group of India) DIPSI non fasting criteria is popularly used in India. There still remains many missed cases of GDM in India, which is a cause of concern. This study was done to compare the DIPSI non fasting, with WHO 2013 criteria for diagnosis of GDM. Methods: this cross-sectional study included 530 pregnant women, attending antenatal clinic of a tertiary care center, of North India, from Feb. 2018 to March 2019 and fulfilling inclusion criteria. All women attending antenatal clinic, during the study period, were subjected to capillary glucose evaluation, 2 hours after 75g oral glucose load, irrespective of the timing of last meal (DIPSI), as part of routine antenatal checkup. After 7 days, only those 530 women, who turned up in fasting state, and fulfilled inclusion criteria, were enrolled in the study and subjected to fasting 75g, oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) (WHO 2013). Accuracy of DIPSI test was compared, to the fasting WHO 2013 criteria. Capillary glucose was measured using regular, well calibrated, point of care, “Optium Free Style” glucometer. Results: Out of 107 women diagnosed to have GDM by WHO 2013 criteria, only 89 were diagnosed by the DIPSI criteria. DIPSI had a low sensitivity (83.18%) when compared to the WHO 2013 criteria, Conclusion: This study showed that when non fasting DIPSI criteria was used as diagnostic criteria, 10.58% women with GDM, missed the diagnosis. Considering the adverse maternal and perinatal outcome of GDM, implication of missed diagnosis would be grave, especially in a developing country, like India. Hence, use of DIPSI criteria for diagnosing GDM should be reconsidered. Key words: GDM, DIPSI, OGTT, Diabetes in Pregnancy.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of diabetes in pregnancy study group India diagnostic criterion in detecting gestational diabetes mellitus: a rural Bangalore study

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 601
Author(s):  
Rajiv Kumar Saxena ◽  
Noor Fathima Tameem Ansari ◽  
Pallavi Singh
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Gestational Diabetes ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Oral Glucose ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Diabetes In Pregnancy ◽  
Capillary Sample ◽  
Iadpsg Criteria ◽  
Venous Sample ◽  
In Pregnancy

Background: The oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) is considered the current standard for diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). International association of diabetes and pregnancy study groups (IADPSG) recommends OGTT, with fasting, one-hour and two-hour venous blood samples drawn after intake of 75g oral glucose. In the Indian context, diabetes in pregnancy study group in India (DIPSI) recommends glucose challenge test (GCT), where 75 g glucose is given irrespective of the fasting state, and a single venous sample is drawn after two-hour. Diagnosis of GDM is made, if any cut-off value is met or exceeded. This prospective study was conducted to compare the DIPSI and IADPSG criteria for diagnosis of GDM.Methods: Pregnant women between 24 to 28 weeks of gestation were subjected to non-fasting GCT. Capillary sample were also drawn simultaneously using Accu check active glucometer. These women were counselled to undergo a standard 75gram OGTT, within a week of recruitment.Results: According to IADPSG criteria, 17.6% (18/102) of our participants had GDM, as compared to 19.6% (20/102) by DIPSI criteria using venous samples, and 25.3% (25/99) by capillary sample method. Sensitivity and specificity of GCT using venous sample was 72.22% and 91.67%, and using capillary sample was 70.59% and 84.15% respectively. DIPSI criteria using venous samples wrongly labelled 8.3% women as GDM, and capillary samples wrongly labelled 15.9% women as GDM. More importantly DIPSI criteria using venous samples labelled 27.8% women as false-negative and capillary samples labelled 29.4% women as false-negative for GDM. Almost one quarter of women with GDM will be missed if DIPSI criteria is used as a universal screening modality.Conclusions: We suggest that the IADPSG criteria be used for diagnosis of GDM in antenatal women in India.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document