尽管高度遵守妊娠糖尿病指南,但分析前诊断仍存在差异。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-06 DOI:10.1080/00365513.2024.2312152
Cathrine Scavenius, Eva Rabing Brix Petersen, Dorte Møller Jensen, Lene Ringholm, Jakoba Sevdal Danielsen, Elisabeth Reinhardt Mathiesen, David McIntyre, Peter Damm, Martin Overgaard, Tine Dalsgaard Clausen
{"title":"尽管高度遵守妊娠糖尿病指南,但分析前诊断仍存在差异。","authors":"Cathrine Scavenius, Eva Rabing Brix Petersen, Dorte Møller Jensen, Lene Ringholm, Jakoba Sevdal Danielsen, Elisabeth Reinhardt Mathiesen, David McIntyre, Peter Damm, Martin Overgaard, Tine Dalsgaard Clausen","doi":"10.1080/00365513.2024.2312152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Regional variations in the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have been found across Denmark. The objectives of this exploratory survey were to evaluate adherence to the national guideline for screening and diagnosing GDM and to identify variations in pre-analytical or analytical factors, which could potentially contribute to variations in GDM prevalence across regions. In a national interview-based survey, obstetric departments and laboratories throughout Denmark handling GDM screening or diagnostic testing were invited to participate. Survey questionnaires were completed through personal interviews. In total, 21 of 22 identified obstetric departments and 44 of 45 identified laboratories participated. Adherence to guideline among obstetric departments ranged 67-100% and uniformity in laboratory procedures was high. However, the gestational age at the time of late diagnostic testing with oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) varied considerably, with 48% (10/21) of departments testing outside the recommended 24-28 weeks' gestation. Procedural heterogeneity was most pronounced for the parts not described in current guidelines, with choice of laboratory equipment being the most diverse factor ranging 3-39% nationally. In conclusion, the overall adherence to the national guidelines was high across regions, and obstetric departments and laboratories had high uniformity in the procedures for screening and diagnosing GDM. Uniformity was generally high for procedures included in the guideline and low if not included. However, a high proportion of GDM testing was performed outside the recommended gestational window in late pregnancy, which may be a pre-analytical contributor to regional differences in GDM prevalence.</p>","PeriodicalId":21474,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"30-37"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pre-analytical diagnostic differences despite high adherence to guidelines for gestational diabetes mellitus.\",\"authors\":\"Cathrine Scavenius, Eva Rabing Brix Petersen, Dorte Møller Jensen, Lene Ringholm, Jakoba Sevdal Danielsen, Elisabeth Reinhardt Mathiesen, David McIntyre, Peter Damm, Martin Overgaard, Tine Dalsgaard Clausen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00365513.2024.2312152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Regional variations in the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have been found across Denmark. The objectives of this exploratory survey were to evaluate adherence to the national guideline for screening and diagnosing GDM and to identify variations in pre-analytical or analytical factors, which could potentially contribute to variations in GDM prevalence across regions. In a national interview-based survey, obstetric departments and laboratories throughout Denmark handling GDM screening or diagnostic testing were invited to participate. Survey questionnaires were completed through personal interviews. In total, 21 of 22 identified obstetric departments and 44 of 45 identified laboratories participated. Adherence to guideline among obstetric departments ranged 67-100% and uniformity in laboratory procedures was high. However, the gestational age at the time of late diagnostic testing with oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) varied considerably, with 48% (10/21) of departments testing outside the recommended 24-28 weeks' gestation. Procedural heterogeneity was most pronounced for the parts not described in current guidelines, with choice of laboratory equipment being the most diverse factor ranging 3-39% nationally. In conclusion, the overall adherence to the national guidelines was high across regions, and obstetric departments and laboratories had high uniformity in the procedures for screening and diagnosing GDM. Uniformity was generally high for procedures included in the guideline and low if not included. However, a high proportion of GDM testing was performed outside the recommended gestational window in late pregnancy, which may be a pre-analytical contributor to regional differences in GDM prevalence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21474,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"30-37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365513.2024.2312152\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365513.2024.2312152","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

丹麦各地的妊娠糖尿病(GDM)发病率存在地区差异。这项探索性调查的目的是评估妊娠糖尿病筛查和诊断国家指南的遵守情况,并找出可能导致各地区妊娠糖尿病患病率差异的分析前或分析因素的变化。在一项以访谈为基础的全国性调查中,丹麦全国各地处理 GDM 筛查或诊断检测的产科部门和实验室均受邀参与。调查问卷通过个人访谈完成。总共有 22 个确定的产科部门中的 21 个和 45 个确定的实验室中的 44 个参与了调查。产科部门对指南的遵守率为 67%-100%,实验室程序的统一性也很高。然而,使用口服葡萄糖耐量试验(OGTT)进行晚期诊断测试时的妊娠年龄差异很大,48%(10/21)的部门在建议的妊娠 24-28 周之外进行测试。程序异质性在现行指南中未描述的部分最为明显,实验室设备的选择是差异最大的因素,在全国范围内占 3-39%。总之,各地区对国家指南的总体遵守程度较高,产科部门和实验室在筛查和诊断 GDM 的程序上具有较高的一致性。指南中包含的程序的统一性普遍较高,而未包含的程序的统一性较低。然而,有很大一部分 GDM 检测是在妊娠晚期推荐的妊娠窗外进行的,这可能是造成 GDM 患病率地区差异的一个分析前因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Pre-analytical diagnostic differences despite high adherence to guidelines for gestational diabetes mellitus.

Regional variations in the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have been found across Denmark. The objectives of this exploratory survey were to evaluate adherence to the national guideline for screening and diagnosing GDM and to identify variations in pre-analytical or analytical factors, which could potentially contribute to variations in GDM prevalence across regions. In a national interview-based survey, obstetric departments and laboratories throughout Denmark handling GDM screening or diagnostic testing were invited to participate. Survey questionnaires were completed through personal interviews. In total, 21 of 22 identified obstetric departments and 44 of 45 identified laboratories participated. Adherence to guideline among obstetric departments ranged 67-100% and uniformity in laboratory procedures was high. However, the gestational age at the time of late diagnostic testing with oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) varied considerably, with 48% (10/21) of departments testing outside the recommended 24-28 weeks' gestation. Procedural heterogeneity was most pronounced for the parts not described in current guidelines, with choice of laboratory equipment being the most diverse factor ranging 3-39% nationally. In conclusion, the overall adherence to the national guidelines was high across regions, and obstetric departments and laboratories had high uniformity in the procedures for screening and diagnosing GDM. Uniformity was generally high for procedures included in the guideline and low if not included. However, a high proportion of GDM testing was performed outside the recommended gestational window in late pregnancy, which may be a pre-analytical contributor to regional differences in GDM prevalence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
85
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation is an international scientific journal covering clinically oriented biochemical and physiological research. Since the launch of the journal in 1949, it has been a forum for international laboratory medicine, closely related to, and edited by, The Scandinavian Society for Clinical Chemistry. The journal contains peer-reviewed articles, editorials, invited reviews, and short technical notes, as well as several supplements each year. Supplements consist of monographs, and symposium and congress reports covering subjects within clinical chemistry and clinical physiology.
期刊最新文献
Analytical interference on measurement of immunoglobulins in monoclonal gammopathy. FlowDiff: a simple, flow cytometry-based approach for performing a leukocyte differential count. Reference intervals for 23 common biochemical parameters during pregnancy and the first six postpartum months. Prevalence of monoclonal proteins in patients with isolated hypogammaglobulinemia on serum protein electrophoresis. Challenges of preanalytical variables in erythrocyte sedimentation rate: a CUBE 30 touch evaluation.
×
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