THE PREVALENCE OF GESTATIONAL DIABETES: COMPARISON BETWEEN CARPENTER–COUSTAN AND NDDG

Background: Currently different criteria are used to diagnose Gestational Diabetes. ACOG (American college of obstetric and Gynecology) accepted NDDG's (criteria National Diabetes Data Group) Criteria and ADA (American Diabetes Association) accepted Carpenter Caustan's. Although both of these criteria have been achieved by O Salivan and Mahan's reaserches, the number of patients has been diagnosed are different .The aim of this study was to compare Gestational Diabetes prevalence according to Carpenter Caustan's and NDDG's Criteria. Methods: 1200 pregnant women were screened in a prenatal care clinic. Patients with definite diabetes were excluded. According to universal GDM  screening method, for all of the patients GCT and GTT (if GCT > 130) were preformed. The results evaluated according to Carpenter Caustan's and NDDG's criteria. Results: In this screening, 377 participants had positive GCT, according to Carpenter and Caustan's criteria 83 women (6.9%), and according to NDDG criteria 50 women (3.6%) had Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. If the cut of point of GCT was 140 mg/dl instead of 130 mg/dl, according to Carpenter and Caustan's criteria 16 women (18.1%), and according to NDDG 4 patients (9%) were missed. Conclusion: Regarding the significant difference between two methods in diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus, assessment of each method value in improving prognosis and outcomes is necessary. According to the results the cut of point of 130mg/dl, as recommended in previous studies, has more accuracy for screening.