English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background : We investigated the treatment effects of tight glycaemic targets in a population universally screened according to the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnant Study Groups (IADPSG)/World Health Organisation (WHO) gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) guidelines. As yet there, have been no randomized control trials evaluating the effectiveness of treatment of mild GDM diagnosed under the IADPSG/WHO diagnostic thresholds. We hypothesize that tight glycaemic control in pregnant women diagnosed with GDM will result in similar clinical outcomes to women just below the diagnostic thresholds. Methods : A multiple cut-off regression discontinuity study design in a retrospective observational cohort undergoing oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) ( n = 1178). Treatment targets for women with GDM were: fasting capillary blood glucose (CBG) of ≤5.0 mmol/L and the 2-h post-prandial CBG of ≤6.7 mmol/L. Regression discontinuity study designs estimate treatment effects by comparing outcomes between a treated group to a counterfactual group just below the diagnostic thresholds with the assumption that covariates are similar. The counterfactual group was selected based on a composite score based on OGTT plasma glucose categories. Results : Women treated for GDM had lower rates of newborns large for gestational age (LGA), 4.6% versus those just below diagnostic thresholds 12.6%, relative risk 0.37 (95% CI, 0.16-0.85); and reduced caesarean section rates, 32.2% versus 43.0%, relative risk 0.75 (95% CI, 0.56-1.01). This was at the expense of increases in induced deliveries, 61.8% versus 39.3%, relative risk 1.57 (95% CI, 1.18-1.9); notations of neonatal hypoglycaemia, 15.8% versus 5.9%, relative risk 2.66 (95% CI, 1.23-5.73); and high insulin usage 61.1%. The subgroup analysis suggested that treatment of women with GDM with BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 drove the reduction in caesarean section rates: 32.9% versus 55.9%, relative risk 0.59 (95%CI, 0.4-0.87). Linear regression interaction term effects between non-GDM and treated GDM were significant for LGA newborns ( p = 0.001) and caesarean sections ( p = 0.015). Conclusions : Tight glycaemic targets reduced rates of LGA newborns and caesarean sections compared to a counterfactual group just below the diagnostic thresholds albeit at the expense of increased rates of neonatal hypoglycaemia, induced deliveries, and high insulin usage.

Estimated Treatment Effects of Tight Glycaemic Targets in Mild Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Multiple Cut-Off Regression Discontinuity Study Design