Changing environment of hyperglycemia in pregnancy: Gestational diabetes and diabetes mellitus in pregnancy

The diagnosis and treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have been in a state of flux since the World Health Organization accepted and endorsed the International Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group's diagnostic pathway and criteria in 2013. These new diagnostic criteria identify an increasing number of women at risk of hyperglycemia in pregnancy (HGiP). Maternal hyperglycemia represents a significant risk to the mother and fetus, in both the short and long term. Controversially, metformin use for the treatment of GDM is increasing in Australia. This article identifies the multiple and varied presentations of HGiP, of which GDM is the most commonly encountered. The degree of maternal hyperglycemia experienced affects the outcomes for both the mother and neonate, and specific diagnosis determines the appropriate treatment for the pregnancy. Given the increasing incidence of women with dysglycemia and those developing HGiP, this is an important area for research and clinical attention for all health professionals.     

Diabetes in developing countries

There has been a rapid escalation of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in developing countries, with varied prevalence according to rural vs urban habitat and degree of urbanization. Some ethnic groups (eg, South Asians, other Asians, and Africans), develop diabetes a decade earlier and at a lower body mass index than Whites, have prominent abdominal obesity, and accelerated the conversion from prediabetes to diabetes. The burden of complications, both macro‐ and microvascular, is substantial, but also varies according to populations. The syndemics of diabetes with HIV or tuberculosis are prevalent in many developing countries and predispose to each other. Screening for diabetes in large populations living in diverse habitats may not be cost‐effective, but targeted high‐risk screening may have a place. The cost of diagnostic tests and scarcity of health manpower pose substantial hurdles in the diagnosis and monitoring of patients. Efforts for prevention remain rudimentary in most developing countries. The quality of care is largely poor; hence, a substantial number of patients do not achieve treatment goals. This is further amplified by a delay in seeking treatment, “fatalistic attitudes”, high cost and non‐availability of drugs and insulins. To counter these numerous challenges, a renewed political commitment and mandate for health promotion and disease prevention are urgently needed. Several low‐cost innovative approaches have been trialed with encouraging outcomes, including training and deployment of non‐medical allied health professionals and the use of mobile phones and telemedicine to deliver simple health messages for the prevention and management of T2D.     

Emerging trends and the clinical impact of food insecurity in patients with diabetes

Food insecurity is a major public health concern in the United States affecting 15 million households according to data in 2017 from the US Department of Agriculture. Food insecurity, or the inability to consistently obtain nutritious food, disproportionately affects socioeconomically disadvantaged households, as well as those with chronic diseases including diabetes mellitus (DM). This review article explores the literature over the past 10 years pertaining to the complex relationship between food insecurity, social determinants of health, and chronic disease with an emphasis on diabetes and glycemic control. Those with diabetes and food insecurity together have been shown to have worse glycemic control compared to those who are food secure, but it remains unclear exactly how food insecurity affects glycemic control. Prior interventional studies have targeted aspects of food insecurity in patients with diabetes but have reported variable outcomes with respect to improvement in glycemic control despite effectively reducing rates of food insecurity. Additionally, few data exist regarding long‐term outcomes and diabetes‐related complications in this population. It is likely that many factors at both the community and individual levels impact glycemic control outcomes in the setting of food insecurity. Further studies are needed to better understand these factors and to create multifaceted targets for future interventional studies aimed at improving glycemic control in this population.