Women's experiences of a diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.
Diagnostic impacts
Gestational diabetes mellitus
Qualitative
Systematic review
Journal
BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 Feb 2020
07 Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
24
09
2019
accepted:
15
01
2020
entrez:
8
2
2020
pubmed:
8
2
2020
medline:
3
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) - a transitory form of diabetes induced by pregnancy - has potentially important short and long-term health consequences for both the mother and her baby. There is no globally agreed definition of GDM, but definition changes have increased the incidence in some countries in recent years, with some research suggesting minimal clinical improvement in outcomes. The aim of this qualitative systematic review was to identify the psychosocial experiences a diagnosis of GDM has on women during pregnancy and the postpartum period. We searched CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for studies that provided qualitative data on the psychosocial experiences of a diagnosis of GDM on women across any stage of pregnancy and/or the postpartum period. We appraised the methodological quality of the included studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist for Qualitative Studies and used thematic analysis to synthesis the data. Of 840 studies identified, 41 studies of diverse populations met the selection criteria. The synthesis revealed eight key themes: initial psychological impact; communicating the diagnosis; knowledge of GDM; risk perception; management of GDM; burden of GDM; social support; and gaining control. The identified benefits of a GDM diagnosis were largely behavioural and included an opportunity to make healthy eating changes. The identified harms were emotional, financial and cultural. Women commented about the added responsibility (eating regimens, appointments), financial constraints (expensive food, medical bills) and conflicts with their cultural practices (alternative eating, lack of information about traditional food). Some women reported living in fear of risking the health of their baby and conducted extreme behaviours such as purging and starving themselves. A diagnosis of GDM has wide reaching consequences that are common to a diverse group of women. Threshold cut-offs for blood glucose levels have been determined using the risk of physiological harms to mother and baby. It may also be advantageous to consider the harms and benefits from a psychosocial and a physiological perspective. This may avoid unnecessary burden to an already vulnerable population.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) - a transitory form of diabetes induced by pregnancy - has potentially important short and long-term health consequences for both the mother and her baby. There is no globally agreed definition of GDM, but definition changes have increased the incidence in some countries in recent years, with some research suggesting minimal clinical improvement in outcomes. The aim of this qualitative systematic review was to identify the psychosocial experiences a diagnosis of GDM has on women during pregnancy and the postpartum period.
METHODS
METHODS
We searched CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for studies that provided qualitative data on the psychosocial experiences of a diagnosis of GDM on women across any stage of pregnancy and/or the postpartum period. We appraised the methodological quality of the included studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist for Qualitative Studies and used thematic analysis to synthesis the data.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 840 studies identified, 41 studies of diverse populations met the selection criteria. The synthesis revealed eight key themes: initial psychological impact; communicating the diagnosis; knowledge of GDM; risk perception; management of GDM; burden of GDM; social support; and gaining control. The identified benefits of a GDM diagnosis were largely behavioural and included an opportunity to make healthy eating changes. The identified harms were emotional, financial and cultural. Women commented about the added responsibility (eating regimens, appointments), financial constraints (expensive food, medical bills) and conflicts with their cultural practices (alternative eating, lack of information about traditional food). Some women reported living in fear of risking the health of their baby and conducted extreme behaviours such as purging and starving themselves.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
A diagnosis of GDM has wide reaching consequences that are common to a diverse group of women. Threshold cut-offs for blood glucose levels have been determined using the risk of physiological harms to mother and baby. It may also be advantageous to consider the harms and benefits from a psychosocial and a physiological perspective. This may avoid unnecessary burden to an already vulnerable population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32028931
doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-2745-1
pii: 10.1186/s12884-020-2745-1
pmc: PMC7006162
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
76Subventions
Organisme : National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia
ID : 1106452
Organisme : National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia
ID : 1080042
Références
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 14;4:6
pubmed: 25588387
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018 Jan 11;18(1):25
pubmed: 29325518
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014 Jan 22;14:41
pubmed: 24450389
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2015 Nov;110(2):109-22
pubmed: 26421361
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015 Apr;129(1):46-9
pubmed: 25595322
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011 Aug;51(4):360-4
pubmed: 21806582
J Clin Nurs. 2014 May;23(9-10):1374-84
pubmed: 24313229
Midwifery. 2013 Jun;29(6):637-45
pubmed: 22877761
N Z Med J. 2010 Nov 26;123(1326):59-67
pubmed: 21326400
J Clin Nurs. 2012 Nov;21(21-22):3244-56
pubmed: 23083394
N Engl J Med. 2008 May 8;358(19):1991-2002
pubmed: 18463375
Diabet Med. 2013 Aug;30(8):986-93
pubmed: 23534548
J Pregnancy. 2016;2016:2670912
pubmed: 28097023
World J Diabetes. 2015 Jul 25;6(8):1024-32
pubmed: 26240699
Women Birth. 2015 Dec;28(4):e157-63
pubmed: 25997731
Can J Diabetes. 2015 Apr;39(2):117-22
pubmed: 25512097
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Nov 27;12:181
pubmed: 23185978
Women Birth. 2019 Feb;32(1):e17-e23
pubmed: 29693546
J Nutr Educ Behav. 2011 Nov-Dec;43(6):482-91
pubmed: 22078771
Health Promot J Austr. 2010 Aug;21(2):130-7
pubmed: 20701563
Women Birth. 2015 Dec;28(4):285-92
pubmed: 26197766
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007 Jan 15;7:4
pubmed: 17224044
Diabet Med. 2018 Apr;35(4):519-529
pubmed: 29338094
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2014 Jul-Aug;39(4):239-45
pubmed: 24978003
Aust J Rural Health. 2016 Dec;24(6):378-384
pubmed: 27087496
Midwifery. 2010 Dec;26(6):579-88
pubmed: 19261362
Diabetes Care. 2002 Oct;25(10):1862-8
pubmed: 12351492
Women Birth. 2013 Jun;26(2):e69-76
pubmed: 23333029
BMJ. 2002 Apr 13;324(7342):892-5
pubmed: 11950741
Matern Child Health J. 2015 Jul;19(7):1526-34
pubmed: 25421329
Scand J Caring Sci. 2010 Sep;24(3):454-62
pubmed: 19878489
Diabetes Care. 2010 Mar;33(3):676-82
pubmed: 20190296
Midwifery. 2009 Oct;25(5):564-75
pubmed: 18206281
Body Image. 2008 Jun;5(2):152-63
pubmed: 18463009
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018 May;139:331-338
pubmed: 29550360
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015 May;291(5):999-1003
pubmed: 25311200
Qual Life Res. 2012 Mar;21(2):291-8
pubmed: 21633879
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Jul 10;8:45
pubmed: 18616818
J Clin Nurs. 2012 May;21(9-10):1374-86
pubmed: 21884559
Aust J Prim Health. 2017 Apr;23(1):66-74
pubmed: 28442034
BMJ Open. 2019 Jan 4;9(1):e023293
pubmed: 30612109
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017 Mar 16;14(1):32
pubmed: 28298219
Diabetes Educ. 2014 Sep-Oct;40(5):668-77
pubmed: 24874692
Sex Reprod Healthc. 2017 Jun;12:16-23
pubmed: 28477926
J Transcult Nurs. 2016 Nov;27(6):593-602
pubmed: 26187924
Qual Health Res. 2005 Jan;15(1):66-81
pubmed: 15574716
Diabetes. 1964 May-Jun;13:278-85
pubmed: 14166677
Scientifica (Cairo). 2016;2016:5489015
pubmed: 27190681
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014 Dec;106(3):401-11
pubmed: 25438939
J Diabetes Res. 2015;2015:209215
pubmed: 25785278
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2012 Aug 09;12:81
pubmed: 22873351
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jan;127(1):10-7
pubmed: 26646142
Midwifery. 2016 Sep;40:141-7
pubmed: 27553869
Rev Bras Enferm. 2013 Mar-Apr;66(2):222-7
pubmed: 23743842
Birth Gaz. 1996 Spring;12(2):32-5
pubmed: 9015958
BMC Womens Health. 2018 Feb 5;18(1):34
pubmed: 29402265
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2018 Mar;44(3):425-431
pubmed: 29323444
Matern Child Health J. 2017 Aug;21(8):1678-1685
pubmed: 28092062
Midwifery. 2008 Jun;24(2):168-82
pubmed: 17360084
ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 2016 Apr-Jun;39(2):181-98
pubmed: 27149230
Midwifery. 2014 Mar;30(3):310-6
pubmed: 23684696
Midwifery. 2005 Mar;21(1):44-60
pubmed: 15740816
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012 Nov;25(11):2464-6
pubmed: 22525002
Scand J Caring Sci. 2018 Jun;32(2):756-764
pubmed: 28856697
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Oct;132(4):859-867
pubmed: 30130344