Search

ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of diabetes prevention strategies addressing postpartum weight retention for women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) delivered at the health system level: mailed recommendations (usual care) versus usual care plus a Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP)-derived lifestyle intervention.Research design and methodsThis study was a cluster randomized controlled trial of 44 medical facilities (including 2,280 women with GDM) randomized to intervention or usual care. The intervention included mailed gestational weight gain recommendations plus 13 telephone sessions between 6 weeks and 6 months postpartum. Primary outcomes included the following: proportion meeting the postpartum goals of 1) reaching pregravid weight if pregravid BMI

BackgroundWomen with gestational diabetes (GDM) are at high risk of developing diabetes later in life. After a GDM diagnosis, women receive prenatal care to control their blood glucose levels via diet, physical activity and medications. Continuing such lifestyle skills into early motherhood may reduce the risk of diabetes in this high risk population. In the Gestational Diabetes' Effects on Moms (GEM) study, we are evaluating the comparative effectiveness of diabetes prevention strategies for weight management designed for pregnant/postpartum women with GDM and delivered at the health system level.Methods/designThe GEM study is a pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial of 44 medical facilities at Kaiser Permanente Northern California randomly assigned to either the intervention or usual care conditions, that includes 2,320 women with a GDM diagnosis between March 27, 2011 and March 30, 2012. A Diabetes Prevention Program-derived print/telephone lifestyle intervention of 13 telephonic sessions tailored to pregnant/postpartum women was developed. The effectiveness of this intervention added to usual care is to be compared to usual care practices alone, which includes two pages of printed lifestyle recommendations sent to postpartum women via mail. Primary outcomes include the proportion of women who reach a postpartum weight goal and total weight change. Secondary outcomes include postpartum glycemia, blood pressure, depression, percent of calories from fat, total caloric intake and physical activity levels. Data were collected through electronic medical records and surveys at baseline (soon after GDM diagnosis), 6 weeks (range 2 to 11 weeks), 6 months (range 12 to 34 weeks) and 12 months postpartum (range 35 to 64 weeks).DiscussionThere is a need for evidence regarding the effectiveness of lifestyle modification for the prevention of diabetes in women with GDM, as well as confirmation that a diabetes prevention program delivered at the health system level is able to successfully reach this population. Given the use of a telephonic case management model, our Diabetes Prevention Program-derived print/telephone intervention has the potential to be adopted in other settings and to inform policies to promote the prevention of diabetes among women with GDM.

OBJECTIVE--To pilot, among women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), the feasibility of a prenatal/postpartum intervention to modify diet and physical activity similar to the Diabetes Prevention Program. The intervention was delivered by telephone, and support for breastfeeding was addressed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--The goal was to help women return to their prepregnancy weight, if it was normal, or achieve a 5% reduction from prepregnancy weight if overweight. Eligible participants were identified shortly after a GDM diagnosis; 83.8% consented to be randomly assigned to intervention or usual medical care (96 and 101 women, respectively). The retention was 85.2% at 12 months postpartum. RESULTS--The proportion of women who reached the postpartum weight goal was higher, although not statistically significant, in the intervention condition than among usual care (37.5 vs. 21.4%, absolute difference 16.1%, P = 0.07). The intervention was more effective among women who did not exceed the recommended gestational weight gain (difference in the proportion of women meeting the weight goals: 22.5%, P = 0.04). The intervention condition de- creased dietary fat intake more than the usual care (condition difference in the mean change in percent of calories from fat: -3.6%, P = 0.002) and increased breastfeeding, although not significantly (condition difference in proportion: 15.0%, P = 0.09). No differences in postpartum physical activity were observed between conditions. CONCLUSIONS--This study suggests that a lifestyle intervention that starts during pregnancy and continues postpartum is feasible and may prevent pregnancy weight retention and help overweight women lose weight. Strategies to help postpartum women overcome barriers to increasing physical activity are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study was undertaken to compare the use of glyburide with insulin for the treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) unresponsive to diet therapy. Study design: A retrospective study was performed among women with singleton pregnancies who had GDM diagnosed, with fasting plasma glucose 140 mg/dL or less on glucose tolerance testing, between 12 and 34 weeks who failed diet therapy from 1999 to 2002. We identified 584 women and compared those treated with insulin between 1999 and 2000 with women treated with glyburide between 2001 and 2002. Maternal and neonatal outcomes and complications were assessed. Statistical methods included univariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression. Results: In 1999 through 2000, 268 women had GDM diagnosed and were treated with insulin; in 2001 through 2002, 316 women had GDM diagnosed of which 236 (75%) received glyburide. The 2 groups were similar with regard to age, nulliparity, and historical GDM risk factors; however, women in the insulin group had a higher mean body mass index (31.9 vs 30.6 kg/m², P = .04), a greater proportion identified themselves as white (43%, 28%, P < .001) and fewer as Asian (24%, 37%, P = .001), and they had a significantly higher mean fasting on glucose tolerance test (105.4 vs 102.4 mg/dL, P = .005) compared with the glyburide group. There were no significant differences in birth weight (3599 ± 650 g vs 3661 + 629 g, P = .3), macrosomia (24%, 25%, P = .7), or cesarean delivery (35%, 39%, P = .4). Women in the glyburide group had a higher incidence of preeclampsia (12%, 6%, P = .02), and neonates in the glyburide group were more likely to receive phototherapy (9%, 5%, P <05), and less likely to be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) (15%, 24%, P = .008) though they had a longer NICU length of stay (4.3 + 9.6 vs 8.0 ± 10.1, P = .002). Posttreatment glycemic control data were available for 122 women treated with insulin and 137 women treated with glyburide. More women in the glyburide group achieved mean fasting and postprandial goals (86%, 63%, P < .001). These findings remained significant in logistic regression analysis. Conclusion: In a large managed care organization, glyburide was at least as effective as insulin in achieving glycemic control and similar birth weights in women with GDM who failed diet therapy. The increased risk of preeclampsia and phototherapy in the glyburide group warrant further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]