Cited by 52Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Management and Research

Two-day postpartum compared with 4- to 12-week postpartum glucose tolerance testing for women with gestational diabetes

Werner, Erika F., Has, Phinarra, Rouse, Dwight, Clark, Melissa A.·2020·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Background A majority of women in the United States with gestational diabetes mellitus do not undergo the recommended 4- to 12-week postpartum glucose tolerance test.Objective This study aimed to compare the diagnostic value of the 2-day postpartum glucose tolerance test with the 4- to 12-week postpartum glucose tolerance test to identify impaired glucose metabolism at 1 year after delivery among women with gestational diabetes.Study design Postpartum women who delivered at 1 hospital between January 2017 and July 2018 were offered enrollment in a prospective cohort if they had gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosed by Carpenter-Coustan criteria or a 1-hour glucose challenge test result of ≥200 mg/dL, spoke English or Spanish, and planned to remain in the hospital for at least 2 days after delivery. Participating women underwent a 75-gram 2-hour glucose tolerance test on postpartum day 2 and were incentivized to have a 4- to 12-week glucose tolerance test and measurement of glycosylated hemoglobin at 1 year after delivery. Participants and providers were blinded to the 2-day postpartum results. The diagnostic value of an abnormal 2-day postpartum glucose tolerance test (fasting result of ≥100 mg/dL or 2-hour glucose tolerance test result of ≥140 mg/dL) was compared with that of an abnormal 4- to 12-week glucose tolerance test to identify impaired glucose metabolism (≥5.7% glycosylated hemoglobin) and diabetes (≥6.5% glycosylated hemoglobin) at 1 year after delivery. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were also compared at 2 days and 4-12 weeks after delivery.Results Of the 300 recruited women, 296 (99%) completed the 2-day postpartum glucose tolerance test, and 202 (68%) returned for the 4- to 12-week glucose tolerance test. Approximately 1 year after delivery, 203 (68%) women had their glycosylated hemoglobin measured, of whom 35% had impaired glucose metabolism and 4% had diabetes. The study population was diverse (46% nonwhite). Furthermore, 56% were obese (mean body mass index, 32 kg/m 2), and 55% had received medication to control their glucose during pregnancy. There were no significant differences between the 2-day and 4- to 12-week postpartum glucose tolerance tests in predicting impaired glucose metabolism based on ≥5.7% glycosylated hemoglobin in 1 year after delivery: sensitivity (46% vs 36%); specificity (79% vs 84%); positive predictive value (52% vs 53%); and negative predictive value (75% vs 72%). There was also no difference between the 2-day and the 4- to 12-week glucose tolerance tests in identifying diabetes at 1 year after delivery. Both the 2-day and 4- to 12-week glucose tolerance tests had similar ROC curves in identifying impaired glucose metabolism and diabetes at 1 year after delivery.Conclusion Two-day postpartum glucose tolerance tests have similar diagnostic value as 4- to 12-week postpartum glucose tolerance tests in predicting impaired glucose metabolism and diabetes at 1 year after delivery and are associated with nearly 100% adherence to the test. Thus, changing the timing of the glucose tolerance test should be considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.05.036

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • OGTT testing immediately postpartum, while still hospitalized, has demonstrated improved engagement in testing but also variably reduced sensitivity to the diagnosis of impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, and type 2 diabetes.

    “OGTT testing immediately postpartum, while still hospitalized, has demonstrated improved engagement in testing but also variably reduced sensitivity to the diagnosis of impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, and type 2 diabetes (131,132).”

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Werner, E. F., Has, P., Rouse, D., & Clark, M. A.
Affiliations
Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
Werner, Erika F.
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
223
Issue
3
Pages
439.e1-439.e7
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3031088801
Cited by
52
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
American Diabetes Association
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
gestational diabetes mellitus, impaired glucose metabolism, postpartum diabetes, HbA1c, diagnostic accuracy, screening timing, receiver operating characteristic, sensitivity and specificity, postpartum women
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Glucose Tolerance Test, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Predictive Value of Tests, Pregnancy, Prenatal Care, Prospective Studies, Time Factors, Cohort Studies, Diabetes, Gestational

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review