Effectiveness of remote monitoring for glycemic control on maternal–fetal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: A meta‐analysis

Author:

Yue Shu‐Wen1ORCID,Zhou Jie1ORCID,Li Lu1ORCID,Guo Jin‐Yi1ORCID,Xu Jing1ORCID,Qiao Jia1ORCID,Redding Sharon R.2ORCID,Ouyang Yan‐Qiong1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Nursing Wuhan University Wuhan China

2. Global Health of Project HOPE Washington DC USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe current pandemic and future public health emergencies highlight the importance of evaluating a telehealth care model. Previous studies have reached mixed conclusions about the effectiveness of remote monitoring on glycemic control and maternal and infant outcomes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).ObjectivesThis meta‐analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of remote blood glucose monitoring for women with gestational diabetes mellitus and to provide evidence‐based guidance on the management of women with gestational diabetes mellitus for policymakers and healthcare providers during situations such as pandemics or natural disasters.MethodsThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Embase, Medline, CINAHL databases, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched from their inception to July 10, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English with respect to remote blood glucose monitoring in women with GDM were included in the meta‐analysis. Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and assessed the quality of the studies. Risk ratios, mean differences, 95% confidence intervals, and heterogeneity were calculated.ResultsA total of 1265 participants were included in the 11 RCTs. There were no significant differences in glycemic control and maternal–fetal outcomes between the remote monitoring group and a standard care group, which included glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose, mean 2‐h postprandial blood glucose, caesarean birth, gestational weight gain, shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycemia, and other outcomes.ConclusionThis meta‐analysis reveals that it is unclear if remote glucose monitoring is preferable to standard of care glucose monitoring. To improve glycemic control and maternal–fetal outcomes during the current epidemic or other natural disasters, the implementation of double‐blind RCTs in the context of simulating similar disasters remains to be studied in the future.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Reference49 articles.

1. Gestational diabetes mellitus: mechanisms, treatment, and complications;Johns EC;Trends Endocrinol Metab,2018

2. The effect of exercise on the prevention of gestational diabetes in obese and overweight pregnant women: a systematic review and meta‐analysis;Nasiri‐Amiri F;Diabetol Metab Syndr,2019

3. American Diabetes Association "standards of medical Care‐2020 for gestational diabetes mellitus": a critical appraisal;Goyal A;Diabetes Ther,2020

4. Interventions to prevent women from developing gestational diabetes mellitus: an overview of Cochrane reviews;Griffith RJ;Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2020

5. Clinical practice guidelines on diabetes mellitus and pregnancy: I. Gestational diabetes mellitus;Anastasiou E;Hormones,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3