GDM: Insulin Therapy (2001)

Citation:
 
Study Design:
Class:
- Click here for explanation of classification scheme.
Quality Rating:
Research Purpose:

The purpose of this review is to evaluate original research addressing criteria for insulin management in gestational diabetes.

Inclusion Criteria:

Research spanning the 20 years prior to this review.

Exclusion Criteria:
None stated.
Description of Study Protocol:

Recruitment:

Original studies spanning the past 20 years prior to this review.

Design:

Narrative Review.

Blinding Used (if applicable):

Not applicable.

Intervention (if applicable):

Not applicable.

Statistical Analysis: 

Not applicable.

Data Collection Summary:

Timing of Measurements:

Not applicable

Dependent Variables:

Not applicable

Independent Variables:

Not applicable

Control Variables: 

Not applicable

Description of Actual Data Sample:

Initial N: 58 studies

Attrition: (Final N):  58

Age:  Not stated

Ethnicity:  Not stated

Other Relevant Demographics:  Not stated

Anthropometrics:  Not stated

Location:  Worldwide studies

Summary of Results:

Other Findings

It is recommended that patients with fasting plasma glucose on the OGTT of <96 mg/dl be assigned to diet therapy and obese women or those with fasting plasma glucose >95 mg/dl on the OGTT be referred for insulin therapy to minimize exposure of the fetus to a hyperglycemic environment.

Studies of women with GDM have shown that macrosomia (birthweight >4000 g) ranges from 7% to 33% and infants large for gestational age (>90th %) ranges from 10% to 47%.

In a large study of patients with GDM, the author demonstrated that when the mean blood glucose level was >105 mg/dl, there was a greater risk for the development of large for gestational age infants.  Also, untreated GDM results in an increased incidence of macrosomia, respiratory distress syndrome, and other abnormalities of fetal metabolism.

Insulin is recommended when standard dietary management does not consistently maintain fasting plasma glucose at <105 mg/dl or the 2-hr postprandial plasma glucose at <120 mg/dl.

In a study by the author, 38% of GDM patients required insulin therapy and of the remaining 62% assigned to diet therapy (plasma glucose <105 mg/dl), 50% failed to achieve near-normoglycemic levels of control with SMBG using memory reflectance meters. This resulted in ~60% of the study population being treated with insulin.

In a 4-wk prospective study by the author, patients with GDM were grouped based on fasting plasma glucose (<95 mg/dl and >95 mg/dl).  In the <95 mg/dl group, 70% achieved good control within the first 2 wk of the study.  In the group >95 mg/dl, only 30% of the cases achieved good control.

A requirement for effective insulin therapy is self-monitoring of blood glucose (SBGM) be performed frequently each day. The use of a memory reflectance meter is the most effective tool in monitoring blood glucose levels over time.

Despite the recommendations for SBGM, only 39% of the maternal/fetal sub specialists in a 1990 survey reported following this recommendation. Of these sub specialists, 52% used weekly management of fasting glucose alone or fasting and postprandial glucose as the method to evaluate glycemic control in spite of the fact that weekly blood glucose measurements are inadequate to prevent macrosomia compared to SBGM.

In a 1995 survey of GDM, it was found that 20% of the diet patients, 63% of patients receiving single doses of insulin and 85% of those on split-dose insulin performed daily SMBG. 

Author Conclusion:

Nonobese patients with fasting plasma glucose on the OGTT of <96 mg/dl should be referred for diet therapy. In obese women or those with fasting plasma >95 mg/dl on the OGTT, insulin therapy can be initiated immediately to avoid exposing the fetus to a hyperglycemic environment. This in conjunction with patient education on the importance of glycemic control improves patient compliance that in turn optimizes the management approach.

Funding Source:
University/Hospital: University of Texas Health Science Center
Reviewer Comments:

RD’s working with women who have GDM should monitor SBGM records and recommend the initiation of insulin when blood glucose goals are not being met.

Quality Criteria Checklist: Review Articles
Relevance Questions
  1. Will the answer if true, have a direct bearing on the health of patients? Yes
  2. Is the outcome or topic something that patients/clients/population groups would care about? Yes
  3. Is the problem addressed in the review one that is relevant to dietetics practice? Yes
  4. Will the information, if true, require a change in practice? Yes
 
Validity Questions
  1. Was the question for the review clearly focused and appropriate? Yes
  2. Was the search strategy used to locate relevant studies comprehensive? Were the databases searched and the search termsused described? ???
  3. Were explicit methods used to select studies to include in the review? Were inclusion/exclusion criteria specified andappropriate? Wereselectionmethods unbiased? ???
  4. Was there an appraisal of the quality and validity of studies included in the review? Were appraisal methodsspecified,appropriate, andreproducible? Yes
  5. Were specific treatments/interventions/exposures described? Were treatments similar enough to be combined? Yes
  6. Was the outcome of interest clearly indicated? Were other potential harms and benefits considered? Yes
  7. Were processes for data abstraction, synthesis, and analysis described? Were they applied consistently acrossstudies and groups? Was thereappropriate use of qualitative and/or quantitative synthesis? Was variation in findings among studies analyzed? Were heterogeneity issued considered? If data from studies were aggregated for meta-analysis, was the procedure described? Yes
  8. Are the results clearly presented in narrative and/or quantitative terms? If summary statistics are used, are levels ofsignificance and/or confidence intervals included? Yes
  9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration? Are limitations ofthe review identified anddiscussed? Yes
  10. Was bias due to the review's funding or sponsorship unlikely? Yes