Revision of guidelines for the management of gestational diabetes mellitus
Authors: Jeremy J N Oats and H David McIntyre
Published online: 20 September 2004
Jeremy J N Oats,* H David McIntyre†
(on behalf of the Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society, in conjunction with the Women’s Health Committee of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists) * Clinical Director, Department of Women’s Services, Royal Women’s Hospital, Carlton, VIC; † Director, Department of Endocrinology, Mater Health Services, South Brisbane, QLD. jeremy.oatsATrwh.org.au
To the Editor: Consensus guidelines for the management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) were prepared by the Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society in 1997–1998 and subsequently published in the Journal.1
Since that time, there have been two minor revisions to these guidelines. The first, in relation to the recommended frequency of follow-up testing of women identified as having GDM, was detailed in a letter to the Editor in 2002.2
The second concerns the timing of delivery of women with GDM. At the request of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG), the original recommendation that “continuation of the pregnancy in uncomplicated GDM to 10 days beyond term is acceptable provided that indications from fetal monitoring are reassuring” has been modified by replacing “10 days beyond term” with “full term” to bring this into line with current practice.
The initial guidelines were arrived at by consensus of Australasian practitioners involved in the care of women with GDM. The Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society recognised, both at the time and subsequently, that the level of evidence available to guide clinical decision-making fell well short of that necessary for a definitive statement on the timing of delivery.
It is noteworthy that no international consensus exists concerning the optimal timing of delivery in pregnancies complicated by GDM. The American Diabetes Association, in its Clinical Practice Guidelines, recommends delivery “during the 38th week . . . unless obstetric considerations dictate otherwise”.3 The European Association of Perinatal Medicine does not make a recommendation, instead stating that “the optimal time of delivery and need to induce labour are still controversial.”4
There is currently a paucity of quality evidence on which to confidently base recommendations. We hope that current studies, such as the Australian Carbohydrate Intolerance in Pregnancy Study and the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Study,5 will provide this evidence.
References
- Hoffman L, Nolan C, Wilson JD, et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus – management guidelines. The Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society. Med J Aust 1998; 169: 93-97.
- Simmons DS, Walters BNJ, Wein P, Cheung NW. Guidelines for the management of gestational diabetes mellitus revisited [letter]. Med J Aust 2002; 176: 352. i1085576
- American Diabetes Association. Position statement. Gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 2003; 26 Suppl 1: S103-S105. i1085578
- European Association of Perinatal Medicine. Diabetes and pregnancy update and guidelines. Perrugia, Italy: EAPM, 2003. i1085580
- HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group. The Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2002; 78: 69-77. i1085582
Forty Years in the Making: Reporting on the Co-Creation of a National Roadmap for Birthing on Country Services for the Best Start to Life
Res McCalman, Anneka J. Bowman, Roianne West, Kristie Watego, Jyai Allen, Claire Clack, Sue Kildea, Sue Kruske, Melanie Briggs, Cleone Wellington, Rebecca Coddington, Yu Gao, Isabella Garti, Sascha Kowalenko, Sarah Ireland, Catherine Austin, John D. Boffa, Marah Prior, Kelsie Kahl, Bettina Chaseling, Sarah Khaw, Emily Armstrong, Donna Hartz, Yvette Roe
Temporal Trends in Preterm Birth Associated With Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy in Victoria, Australia: A Population-Based Interrupted Time-Series Study
Melvin Marzan, Heng Jiang, Daniel Lorber Rolnik, Joanne M. Said, Lisa Hui
Linguistic Manoeuvres: Obstetric Violence Camouflages Harm and Loss of Consent From Birth
Liz Sutton, Harsha Ananthram, Rebecca Matthews
Linguistic Manoeuvres: Obstetric Violence Camouflages Harm and Loss of Consent From Birth
Bashi Kumar-Hazard, Andrew M. Bisits, Sharon L. Settecasse, Jenny Gamble, Hazel Keedle, Hannah G. Dahlen
Linguistic Manoeuvres: Obstetric Violence Camouflages Harm and Loss of Consent From Birth
Wendy Pollock, Alissa Fleming, Ensieh Fooladi, Joy Kloester, Anne Tremayne, Yasmin Zisin, Bethany Carr, Kym Davey, Suzanne Willey, Jenny Gamble
Getting on the Same Page: Why Australia Needs a National Maternity Early Warning System (MEWS) Chart
Briony A. Cutts, Lucy Bowyer, Nisha Khot, Sandra Lowe, Stefan C. Kane