The impact of socioeconomic deprivation on the prevalence of gestational diabetes: An observational study

IF 0.8 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Obstetric Medicine Pub Date : 2023-11-14 DOI:10.1177/1753495x231213920
Sai Gnanasambanthan, Salma Jabak, Retika Mohan, Nawal Dayoub, Chiamaka Maduanusi, Shuchi Kohli, Tabea Haas-Heger, Calum Lynch, Aisha Hameed
{"title":"The impact of socioeconomic deprivation on the prevalence of gestational diabetes: An observational study","authors":"Sai Gnanasambanthan, Salma Jabak, Retika Mohan, Nawal Dayoub, Chiamaka Maduanusi, Shuchi Kohli, Tabea Haas-Heger, Calum Lynch, Aisha Hameed","doi":"10.1177/1753495x231213920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Approximately 3.5% of pregnancies in the United Kingdom are complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Risk factors for this mirror those contributing to type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Though socioeconomic status (SES) is presumed to contribute to GDM, evidence in the United Kingdom is limited. In this unique study, we explored the impact of SES on GDM prevalence in a London suburb population. Four thousand one hundred and sixty-three pregnant women who booked between July 2018 and March 2020 at Princess Royal University Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Associations between GDM prevalence and SES trends (using multiple deprivation deciles (MDD)), and body mass index (BMI), age, ethnicity, screening uptake, birth-weights and birth outcomes, were analyzed. Patients with BMI >30 kg/m2, older than 35 years, and non-Caucasian ethnicity have an increased risk of developing GDM ( p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, respectively). No association existed between MDD and GDM prevalence ( p-values over 0.05). Patients with risk factors for GDM were highest in the deprived areas p < 0.0001. MDD 1–4 (most deprived) had the highest percentage of missed screening (15% of patients with risk factors missed screening), compared to 8% in the least deprived group ( p < 0.0001). Our data surprisingly suggest that low SES did not increase the incidence of GDM, despite a higher proportion of women with risk factors for GDM living in the most deprived postcodes. However this unclear finding may be due to low screening uptake of deprived populations, and therefore lack of GDM diagnosis, or indicate that GDM is a result of a different aetiology to T2DM. Further research is needed to explore if access to screening services, lack of health education or other health inequalities were responsible for the high proportion of missed screening opportunities in deprived areas.","PeriodicalId":51717,"journal":{"name":"Obstetric Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetric Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1753495x231213920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Approximately 3.5% of pregnancies in the United Kingdom are complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Risk factors for this mirror those contributing to type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Though socioeconomic status (SES) is presumed to contribute to GDM, evidence in the United Kingdom is limited. In this unique study, we explored the impact of SES on GDM prevalence in a London suburb population. Four thousand one hundred and sixty-three pregnant women who booked between July 2018 and March 2020 at Princess Royal University Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Associations between GDM prevalence and SES trends (using multiple deprivation deciles (MDD)), and body mass index (BMI), age, ethnicity, screening uptake, birth-weights and birth outcomes, were analyzed. Patients with BMI >30 kg/m2, older than 35 years, and non-Caucasian ethnicity have an increased risk of developing GDM ( p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, respectively). No association existed between MDD and GDM prevalence ( p-values over 0.05). Patients with risk factors for GDM were highest in the deprived areas p < 0.0001. MDD 1–4 (most deprived) had the highest percentage of missed screening (15% of patients with risk factors missed screening), compared to 8% in the least deprived group ( p < 0.0001). Our data surprisingly suggest that low SES did not increase the incidence of GDM, despite a higher proportion of women with risk factors for GDM living in the most deprived postcodes. However this unclear finding may be due to low screening uptake of deprived populations, and therefore lack of GDM diagnosis, or indicate that GDM is a result of a different aetiology to T2DM. Further research is needed to explore if access to screening services, lack of health education or other health inequalities were responsible for the high proportion of missed screening opportunities in deprived areas.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社会经济贫困对妊娠糖尿病发病率的影响:观察研究
在英国,约有 3.5% 的孕妇会并发妊娠糖尿病 (GDM)。其风险因素与 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)的风险因素如出一辙。虽然社会经济地位(SES)被认为是导致 GDM 的原因之一,但英国的证据却很有限。在这项独特的研究中,我们探讨了 SES 对伦敦郊区人群中 GDM 患病率的影响。我们对 2018 年 7 月至 2020 年 3 月期间在皇家公主大学医院预约的 4163 名孕妇进行了回顾性分析。分析了 GDM 患病率与 SES 趋势(使用多重贫困十分位数 (MDD))、体重指数 (BMI)、年龄、种族、筛查接受率、出生体重和出生结果之间的关联。体重指数大于 30 kg/m2、年龄大于 35 岁和非高加索人种的患者罹患 GDM 的风险增加(分别为 p < 0.0001、p < 0.0001、p < 0.0001)。MDD与GDM患病率之间不存在关联(P值大于0.05)。具有 GDM 危险因素的患者在贫困地区最多,p < 0.0001。MDD 1-4(最贫困地区)错过筛查的比例最高(15%有危险因素的患者错过了筛查),而最不贫困地区的比例为 8%(p < 0.0001)。我们的数据出人意料地表明,尽管有 GDM 危险因素的妇女居住在最贫困地段的比例较高,但低社会经济地位并没有增加 GDM 的发病率。然而,这一不明确的发现可能是由于贫困人群接受筛查的比例较低,因此缺乏对 GDM 的诊断,也可能表明 GDM 的病因与 T2DM 不同。还需要进一步的研究来探讨是否是筛查服务的获取、健康教育的缺乏或其他健康不平等导致了贫困地区错过筛查机会的比例较高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Obstetric Medicine
Obstetric Medicine OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
60
期刊最新文献
Extracellular vesicles: A potential new way to assess cholestasis. Hanns-Ulrich Marschall (15.2.1954-1.8.2023). ICP: A midwifery perspective. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy: Introduction and overview 2024. Measuring bile acids: Are we all talking the same language?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1