Articles Tập 67 Số CĐ14-HNKH Hội Hóa sinh Y học Việt Nam 19/09/2026

PREVALENCE OF GESTATIONAL DIABETES MELLITUS, PREDICTIVE VALUE OF HBA1C, AND ASSOCIATED FACTORS AMONG PREGNANT WOMEN AT PHENIKAA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL IN 2025

Nguyen Tong Thong, Nguyen Thi Linh Hoa1,2, Pham Chau Anh, Hoang Van Tuan, Vu Thi Huong, Pham Ngoc Thien
1 Phenikaa School of Medicine and Pharmacy – Phenikaa University
2 Trường Y - Dược Phenikaa- Đại học Phenikaa
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67iCD14.6455
0 Views
0 Downloads
Abstract

Objective: To determine the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and the patterns of glucose abnormalities during the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in pregnant women; to assess the predictive value of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) for GDM; and to identify factors associated with GDM.

Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study conducted among 267 pregnant women at 24–28 weeks of gestation.

Results: The prevalence of GDM in the study population was 28.8%. Abnormal 2-hour post-load glucose accounted for the highest proportion. The most common abnormal OGTT phenotype was combined elevation of 1-hour and 2-hour post-load glucose (35.0%). HbA1c showed fair predictive value for GDM, with an AUC of 0.728. The optimal HbA1c cut-off was 5.35%, with a sensitivity of 49.4% and specificity of 88.4%. Factors strongly associated with GDM included maternal age >35 years (OR = 3.088; 95% CI: 1.064–8.966) and a history of delivering a macrosomic infant weighing >4000 g (OR = 15.972; 95% CI: 1.890–135.008), with p <0.05.

Conclusion: OGTT was useful for detecting GDM, particularly through abnormal 2-hour post-load glucose levels. Maternal age >35 years and a history of delivering a macrosomic infant weighing >4000 g were associated with GDM. HbA1c showed fair predictive value for GDM.

References
[1]
[1] American Diabetes Association. 14. Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2020. Diabetes Care 2019; 43: S183–S192. Google Scholar
[2]
[2] Bùi Chung Thủy, Hồ Thị Tuyết Thu, Huỳnh Thị Ngọc Ánh, Lê Thị Thúy. Khảo sát tỷ lệ đái tháo đường thai kỳ ở thai phụ đến khám thai tại Bệnh viện Phụ sản – Nhi Đà Nẵng. Tạp chí Y Dược học Cần Thơ. 2023; 58: 194-201. https://doi.org/10.58490/ctump.2023i58.711 Google Scholar
[3]
[3] Hoàng Thị Lan Hương. Nghiên cứu tỷ lệ mắc đái tháo đường thai kỳ và các yếu tố liên quan tại bệnh viện Trung ương Huế. Tạp chí Y học lâm sàng Bệnh viện Trung ương Huế. 2023; 89: 7-16. DOI: 10.38103/jcmhch.89.1. Google Scholar
[4]
[4] Wang C, Kong L, Yang Y, et al. Recommended reference values for serum lipids during early and middle pregnancy: a retrospective study from China. Lipids Health Dis 2018; 17: 246. Google Scholar
[5]
[5] Phạm Thị Thanh Thủy, Nguyễn Phương Tú, Nguyễn Hải Phương. Tình hình thực hiện nghiệm pháp dung nạp glucose trong chẩn đoán đái tháo đường thai kỳ tại Bệnh viện Phụ sản Trung ương giai đoạn 3 tháng đầu năm 2023. Tạp chí phụ sản. 2023;21(2):62-6. https://vjog.vn/journal/article/view/1602 Google Scholar
[6]
[6] Nguyễn Thị Huyền Phương, Đoàn Thị Phương Lam, Nguyễn Thị Tố Uyên, et al. Một số yếu tố liên quan đến đái tháo đường thai kỳ ở thai phụ làm nghiệm pháp dung nạp đường huyết tại Bệnh Viện A Thái Nguyên. Tạp chí Y Học Cộng Đồng. 2026;67 (CĐ3-NCKH). DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67iCD3.4737. Google Scholar
[7]
[7] Zhu Y, Zhang C. Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes and Risk of Progression to Type 2 Diabetes: a Global Perspective. Curr Diab Rep 2016; 16: 7. Google Scholar
[8]
[8] Tan YB, Quah PL, Tan KH. Ethnic-specific oral glucose tolerance (OGTT) phenotypes in women with hyperglycemia in pregnancy. BMJ Open Diab Res Care; 12. Epub ahead of print 4 October 2024. DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2024-004331. Google Scholar
[9]
[9] Kwon SS, Kwon J-Y, Park Y-W, et al. HbA1c for diagnosis and prognosis of gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 2015; 110: 38–43. Google Scholar
[10]
[10] Rickard Claesson, Claes Ignell, Nael Shaat, et al. HbA1c as a predictor of diabetes after gestational diabetes mellitus. Primary Care Diabetes 2017; 11: 46–51. Google Scholar