Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

To neutrally offer or strongly recommend? General practitioners' perspectives on screening for gestational diabetes according to the national guideline in Norway.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read Online Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Taylor & Francis Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 8510679 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1502-7724 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 02813432 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Scand J Prim Health Care Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: Philadelphia, PA : Taylor & Francis
      Original Publication: Stockholm, Sweden : Almqvist & Wiksell Periodical Co., [1983-
    • Subject Terms:
      Diabetes, Gestational*/diagnosis ; General Practitioners* ; Focus Groups* ; Mass Screening* ; Practice Guidelines as Topic* ; Attitude of Health Personnel*; Humans ; Female ; Pregnancy ; Norway ; Adult ; Practice Patterns, Physicians' ; General Practice ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Qualitative Research
    • Abstract:
      Objective: To explore general practitioners' experiences and reflections on how the current Norwegian guideline for screening for gestational diabetes affects their clinical practice.
      Design: A qualitive study in which data were collected through semi-structured focus group interviews and analyzed thematically.
      Setting and Subjects: Five focus groups conducted in 2020 among GPs in Norway; three interviews took place face-to-face and two were held digitally. The total number of participants was 31.
      Results: GPs acknowledged the potential benefits of more extensive screening, but had concerns about the medicalization of pregnancy, stating that some women experienced considerable anxiety. The GPs expressed doubts about the guideline's evidence base but differed in how they interpreted what the guideline was asking them to do. Some offered eligible women the opportunity to be screened, while other set up a screening appointment without consulting the women first. For some, fear of incrimination made them recommend screening without being convinced that it was the right thing for the patient.
      Conclusions: It is unclear whether the guideline for gestational diabetes requires GPs to recommend screening to pregnant women or if they should provide neutral information about the availability of screening. This ambiguity should be addressed, and the guideline evaluated against the core principles of general practice.
    • References:
      Endocrinol Diabetes Metab. 2021 Feb 01;4(3):e00230. (PMID: 34277958)
      PLoS One. 2017 Apr 6;12(4):e0175288. (PMID: 28384264)
      Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2022 Jun;101(6):581-588. (PMID: 34699074)
      N Engl J Med. 2023 Jun 8;388(23):2132-2144. (PMID: 37144983)
      Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017 Mar;96(3):372-381. (PMID: 27925166)
      Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2008 Oct 9;128(19):2218-20. (PMID: 18846149)
      Am J Public Health. 1998 Feb;88(2):288-91. (PMID: 9491025)
      BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Nov 1;19(1):398. (PMID: 31675922)
      BMJ. 2014 Nov 10;349:g6680. (PMID: 25385748)
      Diabet Med. 2012 Jul;29(7):844-54. (PMID: 22150506)
      N Engl J Med. 2023 Jun 8;388(23):2193-2194. (PMID: 37145022)
      Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 12;4:54. (PMID: 19674440)
      Scand J Prim Health Care. 2021 Jun;39(2):131-138. (PMID: 33871303)
      Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Aug 03;8:CD007222. (PMID: 28771289)
      Br J Gen Pract. 2016 Mar;66(644):116-7. (PMID: 26917633)
      BMJ. 2014 Mar 11;348:g1567. (PMID: 24618099)
      Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Dec 6;12:ED000143. (PMID: 31808554)
      Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2024 Mar 18;144(4):. (PMID: 38506015)
      Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2018 Jun 12;138(10):. (PMID: 29893096)
      BMJ. 2023 Jan 3;380:e072953. (PMID: 36596571)
      BMJ. 2014 Oct 14;349:g5702. (PMID: 25315302)
      BMJ Open. 2019 May 5;9(5):e023014. (PMID: 31061012)
      Scand J Prim Health Care. 2020 Dec;38(4):367-368. (PMID: 33284030)
      BMJ Open. 2019 Jan 4;9(1):e023293. (PMID: 30612109)
      Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020 Aug;166:108290. (PMID: 32615279)
      BMJ. 2017 Aug 16;358:j3879. (PMID: 28814436)
      Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2024 Jan;207:111025. (PMID: 38000666)
      BJGP Open. 2022 Mar 22;6(1):. (PMID: 34880032)
      BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021 Sep 8;21(1):615. (PMID: 34496778)
      BMJ. 2012 Mar 26;344:e1389. (PMID: 22451477)
      Scand J Public Health. 2012 Dec;40(8):795-805. (PMID: 23221918)
      BMC Fam Pract. 2010 May 19;11:38. (PMID: 20482851)
      Scand J Prim Health Care. 2019 Mar;37(1):135-140. (PMID: 30700201)
      Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2018 Apr 17;138(7):. (PMID: 29663772)
      Qual Health Res. 2016 Nov;26(13):1753-1760. (PMID: 26613970)
      Clin Chem. 2018 Mar;64(3):431-438. (PMID: 29021327)
      Diabetes Care. 2007 Jul;30 Suppl 2:S141-6. (PMID: 17596462)
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: General practitioner; Norway; gestational diabetes; guideline; primary care
      Local Abstract: [plain-language-summary] The Norwegian guideline for gestational diabetes (2017) increased the proportion of pregnant women eligible for screening and spurred considerable debate.The GPs in this study expressed concerns about the lack of evidence and the consequences of screening more women for gestational diabetes.It is unclear to GPs whether they are required to recommend screening to pregnant women or just inform them of its availability.The guideline should be evaluated to better account for the benefits, burdens and costs of screening and any subsequent treatment.
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20240715 Date Completed: 20241108 Latest Revision: 20241113
    • Publication Date:
      20260130
    • Accession Number:
      PMC11552295
    • Accession Number:
      10.1080/02813432.2024.2378204
    • Accession Number:
      39007650