Comparison of healthcare utilization and outcomes by gestational diabetes diagnostic criteria

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare healthcare utilization and outcomes using the Carpenter-Coustan (CC) criteria vs. the National Diabetes Data Group (NDDG) criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Prior to 8/21/2013, patients were classified as "GDM by CC" if they met criteria. After 8/21/2013, patients were classified as "GDM by NDDG" if they met criteria and "Meeting CC non-GDM" if they met CC, but failed to reach NDDG criteria. "Non-GDM" women did not meet any criteria for GDM. Records were reviewed after delivery. Results: There was a 41% reduction in GDM diagnosed using NDDG compared to CC (P = 0.01). There was no significant difference in triage visits, ultrasounds for growth or hospital admissions. Women classified as "Meeting CC non-GDM" were more likely to have preeclampsia than "GDM by CC" women [OR 11.11 (2.7, 50.0), P = 0.0006]. Newborns of mothers "Meeting CC non-GDM" were more likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care units than "GDM by CC" [OR 6.25 (1.7, 33.3), P = 0.006], "GDM by NDDG" [OR 5.56 (1.3, 33.3), P = 0.018] and "Non-GDM" newborns [OR 6.47 (2.6, 14.8), P = 0.0003]. Conclusion: Using the NDDG criteria may increase healthcare costs because while it decreases the number of patients being diagnosed with GDM, it may also increase maternal and neonatal complications without changing maternal healthcare utilization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)401-409
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Perinatal Medicine
Volume46
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - May 24 2018

Fingerprint

Gestational Diabetes
Delivery of Health Care
Diabetes Mellitus
Mothers
Newborn Infant
Triage
Neonatal Intensive Care Units
Pre-Eclampsia
Health Care Costs
Cohort Studies
Retrospective Studies

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

@article{342f77041656488695a13e4854165f40,
title = "Comparison of healthcare utilization and outcomes by gestational diabetes diagnostic criteria",
abstract = "Objective: To compare healthcare utilization and outcomes using the Carpenter-Coustan (CC) criteria vs. the National Diabetes Data Group (NDDG) criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Prior to 8/21/2013, patients were classified as {"}GDM by CC{"} if they met criteria. After 8/21/2013, patients were classified as {"}GDM by NDDG{"} if they met criteria and {"}Meeting CC non-GDM{"} if they met CC, but failed to reach NDDG criteria. {"}Non-GDM{"} women did not meet any criteria for GDM. Records were reviewed after delivery. Results: There was a 41{\%} reduction in GDM diagnosed using NDDG compared to CC (P = 0.01). There was no significant difference in triage visits, ultrasounds for growth or hospital admissions. Women classified as {"}Meeting CC non-GDM{"} were more likely to have preeclampsia than {"}GDM by CC{"} women [OR 11.11 (2.7, 50.0), P = 0.0006]. Newborns of mothers {"}Meeting CC non-GDM{"} were more likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care units than {"}GDM by CC{"} [OR 6.25 (1.7, 33.3), P = 0.006], {"}GDM by NDDG{"} [OR 5.56 (1.3, 33.3), P = 0.018] and {"}Non-GDM{"} newborns [OR 6.47 (2.6, 14.8), P = 0.0003]. Conclusion: Using the NDDG criteria may increase healthcare costs because while it decreases the number of patients being diagnosed with GDM, it may also increase maternal and neonatal complications without changing maternal healthcare utilization.",
author = "Lauring, {Julianne R.} and Allen Kunselman and Jaimey Pauli and John Repke and Serdar Ural",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "24",
doi = "10.1515/jpm-2017-0076",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "401--409",
journal = "Journal of Perinatal Medicine",
issn = "0300-5577",
publisher = "Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG",
number = "4",

}

Comparison of healthcare utilization and outcomes by gestational diabetes diagnostic criteria. / Lauring, Julianne R.; Kunselman, Allen; Pauli, Jaimey; Repke, John; Ural, Serdar.

In: Journal of Perinatal Medicine, Vol. 46, No. 4, 24.05.2018, p. 401-409.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of healthcare utilization and outcomes by gestational diabetes diagnostic criteria

AU - Lauring, Julianne R.

AU - Kunselman, Allen

AU - Pauli, Jaimey

AU - Repke, John

AU - Ural, Serdar

PY - 2018/5/24

Y1 - 2018/5/24

N2 - Objective: To compare healthcare utilization and outcomes using the Carpenter-Coustan (CC) criteria vs. the National Diabetes Data Group (NDDG) criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Prior to 8/21/2013, patients were classified as "GDM by CC" if they met criteria. After 8/21/2013, patients were classified as "GDM by NDDG" if they met criteria and "Meeting CC non-GDM" if they met CC, but failed to reach NDDG criteria. "Non-GDM" women did not meet any criteria for GDM. Records were reviewed after delivery. Results: There was a 41% reduction in GDM diagnosed using NDDG compared to CC (P = 0.01). There was no significant difference in triage visits, ultrasounds for growth or hospital admissions. Women classified as "Meeting CC non-GDM" were more likely to have preeclampsia than "GDM by CC" women [OR 11.11 (2.7, 50.0), P = 0.0006]. Newborns of mothers "Meeting CC non-GDM" were more likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care units than "GDM by CC" [OR 6.25 (1.7, 33.3), P = 0.006], "GDM by NDDG" [OR 5.56 (1.3, 33.3), P = 0.018] and "Non-GDM" newborns [OR 6.47 (2.6, 14.8), P = 0.0003]. Conclusion: Using the NDDG criteria may increase healthcare costs because while it decreases the number of patients being diagnosed with GDM, it may also increase maternal and neonatal complications without changing maternal healthcare utilization.

AB - Objective: To compare healthcare utilization and outcomes using the Carpenter-Coustan (CC) criteria vs. the National Diabetes Data Group (NDDG) criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Prior to 8/21/2013, patients were classified as "GDM by CC" if they met criteria. After 8/21/2013, patients were classified as "GDM by NDDG" if they met criteria and "Meeting CC non-GDM" if they met CC, but failed to reach NDDG criteria. "Non-GDM" women did not meet any criteria for GDM. Records were reviewed after delivery. Results: There was a 41% reduction in GDM diagnosed using NDDG compared to CC (P = 0.01). There was no significant difference in triage visits, ultrasounds for growth or hospital admissions. Women classified as "Meeting CC non-GDM" were more likely to have preeclampsia than "GDM by CC" women [OR 11.11 (2.7, 50.0), P = 0.0006]. Newborns of mothers "Meeting CC non-GDM" were more likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care units than "GDM by CC" [OR 6.25 (1.7, 33.3), P = 0.006], "GDM by NDDG" [OR 5.56 (1.3, 33.3), P = 0.018] and "Non-GDM" newborns [OR 6.47 (2.6, 14.8), P = 0.0003]. Conclusion: Using the NDDG criteria may increase healthcare costs because while it decreases the number of patients being diagnosed with GDM, it may also increase maternal and neonatal complications without changing maternal healthcare utilization.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85037656268&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85037656268&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1515/jpm-2017-0076

DO - 10.1515/jpm-2017-0076

M3 - Article

C2 - 28753546

AN - SCOPUS:85037656268

VL - 46

SP - 401

EP - 409

JO - Journal of Perinatal Medicine

JF - Journal of Perinatal Medicine

SN - 0300-5577

IS - 4

ER -