Dergiler / İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri / 2019 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1

Why some pregnant women refuse glucose challenge test? Turkish pregnant women’s perspectives for gestational diabetes mellitus screening

Sayfa
7–12
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Study findings put forth the need for raising awareness among pregnantwomen and training health-care professionals about the subject.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:OBJECTIVE: Diabetes in pregnancy is associated with several adverse outcomes for both mother and baby.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The purpose of this study was to assess Turkish pregnant women’sopinion and practice about 50-g glucose challenge test (GCT) and to assess the reasons why some of them refuse the test.METHODS: This study was conducted on 312 patients at any age and gestational week in Istanbul, Turkey, by a personalinterview using self-created questionnaire.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Study findings put forth the need for raising awareness among pregnantwomen and training health-care professionals about the subject.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes in pregnancy is associated with several adverse outcomes for both mother and baby. Awareness is thefirst step toward identifying pregnant women with diabetes. The purpose of this study was to assess Turkish pregnant women’sopinion and practice about 50-g glucose challenge test (GCT) and to assess the reasons why some of them refuse the test.METHODS: This study was conducted on 312 patients at any age and gestational week in Istanbul, Turkey, by a personalinterview using self-created questionnaire. Women were asked about their opinion and practice about 50-g GCT.RESULTS: Among women who were ≤28 weeks of gestation, 42.5% (n=82/193) exhibited their desire to have a GCT intheir ongoing pregnancy, 40.9% (n=79/193) pointed out their reluctance, and 16.6% (n=32/193) indicated that they had noopinion about the subject. Women who were ≤28 weeks of gestation and did not want to have GCT, were asked to explainthe reasons of their reluctance. The most frequently indicated reason was the belief that GCT is harmful for their babies andthemselves (n=62/79, 78.5%). Of the women who were >28 weeks of gestation, 37.8% (n=45/119) had GCT in the ongoingpregnancy, while 62.2% (n=74/119) did not have GCT. The most frequently indicated reason why women did not have a GCTwas the belief that GCT is harmful for themselves and the baby (n=37/74, 50%).CONCLUSION: This study exposes an important problem - misinformation about 50-g GCT - that carries a dangerous potential for missing the diagnosis of gestational diabetes. Study findings put forth the need for raising awareness among pregnantwomen and training health-care professionals about the subject.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

YARDIMCI, O. D., GÜNAY, T., KARATEKE, A., TURGUT, A., HOCAOĞLU, M., BOR, E. D., AKDENİZ, E., GÜZİN, K. (2022). Why some pregnant women refuse glucose challenge test? Turkish pregnant women’s perspectives for gestational diabetes mellitus screening. İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1, 7–12. https://ajindex.com/articles/551481

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (3)

  1. Committee on Practice Bulletins – Obstetrics. Practice bulletin no 137: Gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:406–16
  2. Moyer VA; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for gesta tional diabetes mellitus: U.S. Preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:414–20. [CrossRef ] 3. Yogev Y, Xenakis EM, Langer O. The association between preeclampsia and the severity of gestational diabetes: The impact of glycemic control. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:1655–60. [CrossRef ] 4. Horvath K, Koch K, Jeitler K, Matyas E, Bender R, Bastian H, et al. Effects of treatment in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: Systematic review and meta–analysis. BMJ 2010;340:c1395. [CrossRef ] 5. Crowther CA, Hiller JE, Moss JR, McPhee AJ, Jeffries WS, Robinson JS, et al. Effect of treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus on pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 2005;352:2477–86. [CrossRef ] 6. Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, Carpenter MW, Ramin SM, Casey B, et al. A multicenter, randomized trial of treatment for mild gestational diabetes. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1339–48. [CrossRef ] 7. Poston L. Developmental programming and diabetes – The human experience and insight from animal models. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2010;24:541–52. [CrossRef ] 8. Schmitz S, Groten T, Schleussner E, Battefeld W, Hillemanns P, Schippert C, et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus: An evaluation of gynecologists’ knowledge of guidelines and counseling behavior. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2016;294:1209–17. [CrossRef ] 9. van Leeuwen M, Louwerse MD, Opmeer BC, Limpens J, Serlie MJ, Reitsma JB, et al. Glucose challenge test for detecting gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review. BJOG 2012;119:393–401. [CrossRef ] 10. Langer O, Yogev Y, Most O, Xenakis EM. Gestational diabetes: The con–sequences of not treating. Am J ObstetGynecol 2005;192:989– 97. [CrossRef ] 11. Türkyılmaz E, Keleştemur, Eray IK, Ocal FG, Avşar AY. Knowledge level, attitude and behaviours about glucose challenge test among Turkish pregnant women. Ankara Med J 2016;16:191–9
  3. Rasmussen SS, Glümer C, Sandbaek A, Lauritzen T, Carstensen B, Borch-Johnsen K, et al. Short-term reproducibility of impaired fasting glycaemia, impaired glucose tolerance and diabetes the ADDITION study, DK. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2008;80:146–52. [CrossRef ] 13. Donovan L, Hartling L, Muise M, Guthrie A, Vandermeer B, Dryden DM, et al. Screening tests for gestational diabetes: A systematic review f