Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2026 Jun 26.
Published in final edited form as: Prim Care Diabetes. 2026 May 21;20(4):474–476. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2026.05.005

Type 2 diabetes screening 1-3 years postpartum in individuals with gestational diabetes

Sereen K Nashif a,b, Briana Clifton b, Basra Osman b, Katelyn M Tessier c, Sarah A Wernimont a,b,d
PMCID: PMC13294995  NIHMSID: NIHMS2179642  PMID: 42167967

SUMMARY

In a retrospective cohort of 5,801 births from individuals with gestational diabetes, 363 (6%) completed 4-12-week postpartum screening for GDM and had evidence of ongoing clinical care in our system. Among these, only half completed recommended type 2 diabetes screening 1–3 years postpartum. Screening rates did not vary by demographic or clinical factors and were primarily performed by primary care clinicians, highlighting persistent gaps in long-term diabetes surveillance after gestational diabetes.

Keywords: Gestational Diabetes, Pregnancy, Type 2 Diabetes, Screening

INTRODUCTION

Gestational diabetes (GDM) is one of the most common pregnancy complications affecting 6% of pregnancies in the US.[1] Individuals with GDM in pregnancy have up to a 60% lifetime risk of developing type 2 diabetes (T2DM).[2] Given this increased risk, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommend that individuals with GDM have enhanced lifelong screening for T2DM following their pregnancy. Guidelines state that individuals with GDM should be screened for diabetes between 4-12 weeks postpartum and if negative, every 1–3 years thereafter.[3]

While it is known that overall adherence to T2DM screening at 4-12 weeks is low,[4] little is known about provider adherence to diabetes screening beyond 1 year postpartum among US populations. We sought to quantify adherence to this guideline and identify factors associated with screening completion.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study using an established obstetric outcomes database within an academic-community healthcare system that includes an urban tertiary care academic hospital and five suburban and rural satellite hospitals[5]. This study received IRB approval (# STUDY00016861) and is reported using STROBE guidelines.[6]

We identified index, singleton, non-anomalous pregnancies affected by GDM with birth between 2014-2019. Individuals were diagnosed with GDM in pregnancy using a two-step approach in accordance with ACOG guidelines[7]. Because many individuals receive obstetric and primary care in private practices, laboratory data are not uniformly integrated into the system electronic health record (EHR), limiting the ability to ascertain longitudinal follow-up. To ensure data completeness, we restricted our cohort to individuals with documented ongoing engagement in our health system postpartum. Specifically, we only included those who (1) completed a 4–12-week postpartum 75-gram OGTT that ruled out T2DM AND (2) had documented outpatient clinical care within our system 1–3 years after birth.

Exclusion criteria included: multifetal gestation, major fetal anomalies, pregestational diabetes, individuals who did not receive care within our health system within specified postpartum time frame, and subsequent births by the same individual. We defined major fetal anomalies as birth defects diagnosed prenatally that may result in a neonatal intensive care unit admission or neonatal surgery. This study timeframe was chosen because the ADA first recommended this enhanced T2DM screening in 2013, and we expected a 1-year grace period to allow for its incorporation into care. We chose 2019 as the endpoint so as to capture individuals undergoing 3-year screening at the time this study was initiated.

The electronic health record was used to assess whether individuals had recommended screening using hemoglobin A1c (A1c), fasting plasma glucose, or 75-gram OGTT. Clinical characteristics and clinician types were compared between groups using Student's t-tests, Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests as indicated. Reported p-values are two-sided and a significance level of 0.05 was used. Statistical analyses were performed using R (version 4.2.2, R Core Team).

RESULTS

Between 2014-2019, 5,801 of 53,659 births from individuals with GDM were identified. We identified 363 that completed 4–12-week postpartum screening, of which, 297 had ongoing clinical care within our system and no evidence of T2DM on this immediate postpartum screening (Figure 1). 152 (51.2%) were screened for diabetes 1-3 years postpartum. There was no difference in 1–3-year screening rates based on age, parity, race, BMI, insurance status, GDM type, GDM medication use, or number of previous pregnancies impacted by GDM (Table 1). Of those that received screening, 4.6% met criteria for T2DM.

Figure 1:

Figure 1:

Flow Chart

Table 1:

Screened 1-3 years
after birth
 N=152)
Not screened 1-3 years
after birth (N=145)
P-Value1
Age, mean (SD) 33.4 (4.6) 33.0 (4.1) 0.426
Multiparous, n (%) 87 (57.2%) 77 (53.1%) 0.474
Race2, n (%) 0.330
White 72 (51.4%) 73 (54.5%)
Black 32 (22.9%) 22 (16.4%)
Asian 29 (20.7%) 36 (26.9%)
American Indian or Alaska Native 2 (1.4%) 0 (0.0%)
More than 1 race 5 (3.6%) 3 (2.2%)
Pre-pregnancy BMI3 (kg/m2), mean (SD) 29.2 (7.1) 28.3 (5.8) 0.449
Insurance type, n (%) 0.943
Uninsured 10 (6.6%) 11 (7.6%)
Public 41 (27.0%) 39 (26.9%)
Private 101 (66.4%) 95 (65.5%)
Diabetes type, n (%) 0.404
GDM without medication 65 (42.1%) 69 (46.9%)
GDM requiring medication 87 (57.9%) 76 (53.1%)
Diabetes medication type, n (%) 0.165
 None 65 (42.8%) 69 (47.6%)
 Insulin 56 (36.8%) 52 (35.2%)
 Metformin 3 (2.0%) 0 (0.0%)
 Glyburide 27 (17.8%) 21 (14.5%)
 Insulin and metformin 1 (0.7%) 0 (0.0%)
 Other 0 (0.0%) 3 (2.1%)
Number of pregnancies affected by GDM, n (%) 0.197
 1 120 (78.9%) 119 (82.1%)
 2 26 (17.1%) 24 (16.6%)
 3 6 (3.9%) 1 (0.7%)
 4 0 (0.0%) 1 (0.7%)

BMI: body mass index; GDM: gestational diabetes, SD: standard deviation

1

To investigate the association between 1-3 years postpartum screening and continuous variables, Student's t-tests were used. Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used for categorical variables.

2

Race was missing for 12 individuals who were screened and 11 who were not screened.

3

BMI was missing for 1 individual who was screened and 1 individual who was not screened.

The postpartum screening was completed by a primary care clinician (43.4%), obstetrician-gynecologist (OBGYN) (21.7%), midwife (12.5%), endocrinologist (0.7%), unknown provider type (4.6%), or multiple clinician types (15.1%). A1c (88.2%) was the primary screening test, with 75-gram OGTT (1.3%) and multiple screening tests (9.2%) used less frequently (Supplemental Table 1).

DISCUSSION

Approximately 50% of individuals who complete a 4–12-week postpartum OGTT and have ongoing clinical care in our system were screened for T2DM 1-3 years postpartum. We did not identify differences in clinical characteristics between the two cohorts. Primary care clinicians ordered screening tests most often, and A1c was the most frequently ordered test. This highlights opportunities to improve screening beyond the 1st postpartum year and demonstrates that primary care clinicians can play an important role in performing this screening.

Strengths of this study include the use of a large clinical obstetric outcomes database and defined criteria to identify individuals who remain engaged with care within the system (completing both the 2-hour OGTT at 4–12-weeks and having evidence of ongoing clinical care in the system). By examining pregnancies between 2014-2019, we ensured that sufficient time was available to examine relevant testing outcomes in the system. Several limitations are noted. Restriction to individuals with ongoing care within our system and completion of a 4–12-week postpartum oral glucose tolerance test—which is acknowledged to be completed by only a subset of eligible individuals[4, 8]—likely enriched the cohort for patients with higher healthcare engagement, limiting generalizability. Additionally, laboratory testing performed outside the system may not have been captured, although this was partially mitigated by the requirement for continued in-system care. While this study focuses on guidelines from the ADA and ACOG, other international organizations suggest additional screening for overt diabetes for those with a history of GDM and therefore has generalizability to other populations.[9, 10]

Given that up to 60% of individuals with GDM develop T2DM in their lifetime,[2] ACOG and ADA guidelines recommend that individuals with a history of GDM have lifelong screening for T2DM. Studies have previously demonstrated poor adherence to T2DM screening in the first 1-3 months postpartum, however, less is known about how often screening happens in the 1-3 years following pregnancy. One study identified annual screening rates of 23% following pregnancy with GDM,[8] and a recent analysis of claims data found that only 50% of individuals with GDM access primary care services within one year of birth.[11] Here, we find that in a population demonstrating ongoing engagement within a health system, only 51% receive indicated screening within 1-3 years postpartum. We suspect that rates are overall lower when accounting for those who do not engage in care.

This work highlights opportunities to improve rates of screening for individuals with GDM. Timely diagnosis of diabetes could allow for earlier interventions to reduce risk of diabetes-related complications. Further work is needed to evaluate effective interventions to improve this guideline-directed screening.

Supplementary Material

1

Highlights.

  • 51% of individuals with gestational diabetes had type 2 diabetes screening 1–3 years postpartum.

  • Screening did not differ by age, insurance status, gestational diabetes type or history.

  • Screening was most frequently completed by primary care clinicians.

  • Hemoglobin A1c was the most commonly used screening test.

Funding:

Research reported in this publication was supported by NIH grant P30 CA77598 utilizing the Biostatistics Core shared resource of the Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, and by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health Award Number UM1TR004405. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The investigators also received support from the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women’s Health at the University of Minnesota. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or manuscript writing. The funders had no role in the decision to submit the paper.

Abbreviations:

GDM

Gestational Diabetes

T2DM

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Footnotes

Conflicts of Interest

The Authors have no Conflicts of Interest to Report

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Data Availability:

All de-identified data supporting the findings of this study are available upon reasonable request.

References:

  • [1].Deputy NP, Kim SY, Conrey EJ, Bullard KM, Prevalence and Changes in Preexisting Diabetes and Gestational Diabetes Among Women Who Had a Live Birth - United States, 2012-2016, MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep, 67 (2018) 1201–1207. [Google Scholar]
  • [2].Li Z, Cheng Y, Wang D, Chen H, Chen H, Ming WK, Wang Z, Incidence Rate of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus after Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 170,139 Women, Journal of diabetes research, 2020 (2020) 3076463. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [3].C. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice, 15. Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2025, Diabetes Care, 48 (2025) S306–S320. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [4].Tovar A, Chasan-Taber L, Eggleston E, Oken E, Postpartum screening for diabetes among women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus, Prev Chronic Dis, 8 (2011) A124. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [5].Nashif SK, Mahr RM, Tessier KM, Hoover EA, Ajagbe-Akingbola O, Chiu E, Andrews JI, Sabol BA, Rogers WK, Wernimont SA, Neonatal outcomes and rationale for timing of birth in perinatal diabetes: a retrospective cohort study, Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM, 5 (2023) 101129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [6].von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, S. Initiative, The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies, J Clin Epidemiol, 61 (2008) 344–349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [7].ACOG, Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Practice Bulletin No. 190, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 131 (2018) e49–e64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [8].Vounzoulaki E, Khunti K, Miksza JK, Tan BK, Davies MJ, Gillies CL, Screening for type 2 diabetes after a diagnosis of gestational diabetes by ethnicity: A retrospective cohort study, Prim Care Diabetes, 16 (2022) 445–451. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [9].NICE, Diabetes in pregnancy: management from preconception to the postnatal period, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, (2020). [Google Scholar]
  • [10].Hod M, Kapur A, Sacks DA, Hadar E, Agarwal M, Di Renzo GC, Cabero Roura L, McIntyre HD, Morris JL, Divakar H, The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Initiative on gestational diabetes mellitus: A pragmatic guide for diagnosis, management, and care, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 131 Suppl 3 (2015) S173–211. [Google Scholar]
  • [11].D'Amico R, Dalmacy D, Akinduro JA, Hyer M, Thung S, Mao S, Fareed N, Bose-Brill S, Patterns of Postpartum Primary Care Follow-up and Diabetes-Related Care After Diagnosis of Gestational Diabetes, JAMA Netw Open, 6 (2023) e2254765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

1

Data Availability Statement

All de-identified data supporting the findings of this study are available upon reasonable request.

RESOURCES