Acta Diabetologica

, Volume 54, Issue 7, pp 645–651 | Cite as

Early screening for type 2 diabetes following gestational diabetes mellitus in France: hardly any impact of the 2010 guidelines

  • K. Goueslard
  • J. Cottenet
  • A.-S. Mariet
  • P. Sagot
  • J.-M. Petit
  • C. Quantin
Original Article



Women who had gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have a high risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the years following pregnancy. Most follow-up screening studies have been conducted in limited geographical areas leading to large variability in the results. The aim of our investigation was to measure how the publication of guidelines affected early screening for T2DM after a pregnancy with GDM during the period 2007–2013, in France.


We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a representative sample of 1/97th of the French population using data from the “National Health Insurance Inter-Regime Information System,” which collects individual hospital and non-hospital data for healthcare consumption.


The sample included 49,080 women who gave birth in 2007–2013. In the following 3 months, only 18.49% of women with GDM had an oral glucose tolerance test or a blood glucose test in 2007. This rate had not significantly increased in 2013 (p = 0.18). The proportion of women with GDM who had the recommended glycemic follow-up at 3 months (20.30 vs. 21.58%, p = 0.19) and 6 months (32.48 vs. 37.16%, p = 0.08) was not significantly different before the guidelines (2008–2009) and after the guidelines (2012–2013). At 12 months, the difference was significant (46.77 vs. 54.05%, p = 0.009).


Postpartum screening has improved only slightly since the guidelines and remains largely insufficient, with less than 25% of women with GDM screened in the first 3 months. In the first year after delivery, less than 60% of women were screened for T2DM.


Gestational diabetes mellitus Type 2 diabetes mellitus Guidelines Screening Glucose test 



This work was supported by the Public Health Research Institute (Institut de Recherche en Santé Publique: IRESP) in 2017.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard

This study was approved by the French Institute of Health Data (IDS) (registration number 114, 3 February 2015).

Informed consent

Written consent was not needed for this study since this study used an anonymized database and had no influence on patients care.


  1. 1.
    DeSisto CL, Kim SY, Sharma AJ (2014) Prevalence estimates of gestational diabetes mellitus in the United States, pregnancy risk assessment monitoring system (PRAMS), 2007–2010. Prev Chronic Dis 11:E104CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buckley BS, Harreiter J, Damm P et al (2012) Gestational diabetes mellitus in Europe: prevalence, current screening practice and barriers to screening. A review. Diabet Med J Br Diabet Assoc 29(7):844–854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Regnault N, Salanave B, Castetbon K et al (2016) Gestational diabetes in France in 2012: screening, prevalence and treatment modalities during pregnancy. Bull Epidémiol Hebd 9:164–173Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group, Metzger BE, Lowe LP et al (2008) Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 358(19):1991–2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim C, Newton KM, Knopp RH (2002) Gestational diabetes and the incidence of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Diabet Care 25(10):1862–1868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rayanagoudar G, Hashi AA, Zamora J et al (2016) Quantification of the type 2 diabetes risk in women with gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 95,750 women. Diabetologia 59(7):1403–1411CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Köhler M, Ziegler AG, Beyerlein A (2016) Development of a simple tool to predict the risk of postpartum diabetes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus. Acta Diabetol 53(3):433–437CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Noctor E, Crowe C, Carmody LA et al (2015) ATLANTIC-DIP: prevalence of metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance in women with previous gestational diabetes mellitus by International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Groups criteria. Acta Diabetol 52(1):153–160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    American Diabetes Association (2010) Standards of medical care in diabetes-2010. Diabetes Care 33(Suppl 1):S11–S61CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barry E, Roberts S, Oke J et al (2017) Efficacy and effectiveness of screen and treat policies in prevention of type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis of screening tests and interventions. BMJ 356:i6538CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines NetworK. Healthcare Improvement Scotland. Management of diabetes. Quick Reference GuideMarch 2010. [Internet]. Disponible sur.
  12. 12.
    Damm P, Ovesen P, Andersen LL et al. Clinical guidelines for gestational diabetes mellitus. [Internet]. Disponible sur.
  13. 13.
    Simmons D, McElduff A, McIntyre HD, Elrishi M (2010) Gestational diabetes mellitus: NICE for the US? A comparison of the American Diabetes Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines with the U.K. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines. Diabetes Care 33(1):34–37CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Micheli A (2008) Italian standards for diabetes mellitus 2007: executive summary : diabete Italia, AMD associazione medici diabetologi, SID Società Italiana di Diabetologia. Acta Diabetol 45(2):107–127CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Collège National des Gynécologues et Obstétriciens Français (2010) Société francophone du diabète. [Gestational diabetes]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 39(8 Suppl 2):S139, S338–S342Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carson MP, Frank MI, Keely E (2013) Original research: postpartum testing rates among women with a history of gestational diabetes—systematic review. Prim Care Diabetes 7(3):177–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nielsen KK, Kapur A, Damm P, de Courten M, Bygbjerg IC (2014) From screening to postpartum follow-up—the determinants and barriers for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) services, a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 14:41CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim C, Tabaei BP, Burke R et al (2006) Missed opportunities for type 2 diabetes mellitus screening among women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus. Am J Public Health 96(9):1643–1648CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shah BR, Lipscombe LL, Feig DS, Lowe JM (2011) Missed opportunities for type 2 diabetes testing following gestational diabetes: a population-based cohort study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol 118(12):1484–1490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chamberlain C, McLean A, Oats J et al (2015) Low rates of postpartum glucose screening among indigenous and non-indigenous women in Australia with gestational diabetes. Matern Child Health J 19(3):651–663CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hunt KJ, Conway DL (2008) Who returns for postpartum glucose screening following gestational diabetes mellitus? Am J Obstet Gynecol 198(4):404.e1–404.e6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Olesen CR, Nielsen JH, Mortensen RN et al (2014) Associations between follow-up screening after gestational diabetes and early detection of diabetes—a register based study. BMC Public Health 14:841CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Blatt AJ, Nakamoto JM, Kaufman HW (2011) Gaps in diabetes screening during pregnancy and postpartum. Obstet Gynecol 117(1):61–68CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Clark HD, van Walraven C, Code C, Karovitch A, Keely E (2003) Did publication of a clinical practice guideline recommendation to screen for type 2 diabetes in women with gestational diabetes change practice? Diabetes Care 26(2):265–268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Quantin C, Benzenine E, Fassa M et al (2012) Evaluation of the interest of using discharge abstract databases to estimate breast cancer incidence in two French departments. J Int Assoc Off Stat 28:73–85Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Quantin C, Benzenine E, Ferdynus C et al (2013) Advantages and limitations of using national administrative data on obstetric blood transfusions to estimate the frequency of obstetric hemorrhages. J Public Health Oxf Engl 35(1):147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Quantin C, Benzenine E, Velten M et al (2013) Self-controlled case series and misclassification bias induced by case selection from administrative hospital databases: application to febrile convulsions in pediatric vaccine pharmacoepidemiology. Am J Epidemiol 178(12):1731–1739CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Aboa-Eboulé C, Mengue D, Benzenine E et al (2013) How accurate is the reporting of stroke in hospital discharge data? A pilot validation study using a population-based stroke registry as control. J Neurol 260(2):605–613CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Quantin C, Cottenet J, Vuagnat A et al (2014) Quality of perinatal statistics from hospital discharge data: comparison with civil registration and the 2010 National Perinatal Survey. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 43(9):680–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goueslard K, Revert M, Pierron A et al (2016) Evaluation of the metrological quality of medico-administrative data for perinatal indicators: a pilot study. J Community Med Health Educ 6:437Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Abdulmalak C, Cottenet J, Beltramo G et al (2015) Haemoptysis in adults: a 5-year study using the French nationwide hospital administrative database. Eur Respir J 46(2):503–511CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lainay C, Benzenine E, Durier J et al (2015) Hospitalization within the first year after stroke: the Dijon stroke registry. Stroke 46(1):190–196CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lorgis L, Cottenet J, Molins G et al (2013) Outcomes after acute myocardial infarction in HIV-infected patients: analysis of data from a French nationwide hospital medical information database. Circulation 127(17):1767–1774CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Goueslard K, Cottenet J, Mariet A-S et al (2016) Early cardiovascular events in women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus. Cardiovasc Diabetol 15:15CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tovar A, Chasan-Taber L, Eggleston E, Oken E (2011) Postpartum screening for diabetes among women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus. Prev Chronic Dis 8(6):A124PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wilkinson SA, Lim SS, Upham S et al (2014) Who’s responsible for the care of women during and after a pregnancy affected by gestational diabetes? Med J Aust 201(3 Suppl):S78–S81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    American Diabetes Association (2014) Standards of medical care in diabetes—2014. Diabetes Care 37(Suppl 1):S14–S80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Billionnet C, Weill A, Ricordeau P et al (2014) Diabète gestationnel et grossesse: données de la population française 2011. Diabetes Metab 40(1):A15Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bennett WL, Ennen CS, Carrese JA et al (2011) Barriers to and facilitators of postpartum follow-up care in women with recent gestational diabetes mellitus: a qualitative study. J Womens Health 20(2):239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cosson E, Bihan H, Vittaz L et al (2015) Improving postpartum glucose screening after gestational diabetes mellitus: a cohort study to evaluate the multicentre IMPACT initiative. Diabet Med J Br Diabet Assoc 32(2):189–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Keely E, Clark H, Karovitch A, Graham I (2010) Screening for type 2 diabetes following gestational diabetes: family physician and patient perspectives. Can Fam Phys Med Fam Can 56(6):558–563Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chittleborough CR, Baldock KL, Taylor AW et al (2010) Long-term follow-up of women with gestational diabetes mellitus: the South Australian Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Recall Register. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 50(2):127–131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Clark HD, Graham ID, Karovitch A, Keely EJ (2009) Do postal reminders increase postpartum screening of diabetes mellitus in women with gestational diabetes mellitus? A randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 200(6):634.e1–634.e7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Yarrington C, Zera C (2015) Health systems approaches to diabetes screening and prevention in women with a history of gestational diabetes. Curr Diabetes Rep 15(12):114CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Goueslard
    • 1
    • 2
  • J. Cottenet
    • 1
    • 2
  • A.-S. Mariet
    • 1
    • 2
  • P. Sagot
    • 3
  • J.-M. Petit
    • 4
    • 5
  • C. Quantin
    • 1
    • 2
    • 6
    • 7
  1. 1.Service de Biostatistique et d’Informatique Médicale (DIM)CHRU DijonDijonFrance
  2. 2.Université de BourgogneDijonFrance
  3. 3.Service de Gynécologie-Obstétrique et Médecine de la ReproductionCHRU de DijonDijonFrance
  4. 4.Centre de Recherche INSERM Unité 866University of Bourgogne Franche-ComtéDijonFrance
  5. 5.Services de Diabétologie et EndocrinologieCHRU DijonDijonFrance
  6. 6.INSERM, CIC 1432, Dijon University HospitalClinical Investigation Center, Clinical Epidemiology/Clinical Trials UnitDijonFrance
  7. 7.Biostatistics, Biomathematics, Pharmacoepidemiology and Infectious Diseases (B2PHI), INSERM, UVSQ, Institut PasteurUniversité Paris-SaclayParisFrance

Personalised recommendations