HSA 507 Marywood University Exercise During Pregnancy Article Analysis and Questions Step 1: Read “The Efficacy of moderate-to-vigorous resistance exercise

HSA 507 Marywood University Exercise During Pregnancy Article Analysis and Questions Step 1: Read “The Efficacy of moderate-to-vigorous resistance exercise during pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Step 2: Answer the below questions. HINT: I hope you hit on some of the key terms from text. A C TA Obstetricia et Gynecologica
AOGS M A I N R E SE A RC H A R TI C LE
The efficacy of moderate-to-vigorous resistance exercise
during pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial
KAROLINA PETROV FIERIL1, ANNA GLANTZ2 & MONIKA FAGEVIK OLSEN1
1
Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, and 2Antenatal Care, Primary Health Care,
Gothenburg, Sweden
Key words
Exercise, pregnancy, public health,
randomized controlled trial
Correspondence
Karolina Petrov Fieril, N€
arh€
alsan,
Rehabmottagning, Olskroken, 416 65
Gothenburg, Sweden.
E-mail: karolina.fieril@vgregion.se
Conflict of interest
The authors have stated explicitly that there
are no conflicts of interest in connection with
this article.
Please cite this article as: Petrov Fieril K,
Glantz A, Fagevik Olsen M. The efficacy of
moderate-to-vigorous resistance exercise
during pregnancy: a randomized controlled
trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2015; 94:
35–42.
Received: 14 April 2014
Accepted: 29 September 2014
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.12525
Abstract
Objectives. To assess the effect and safety of moderate-to-vigorous resistance
exercise during pregnancy. Design. Randomized controlled study. Setting. Two
antenatal clinics in Gothenburg, Sweden. Population. Ninety-two healthy pregnant women. Methods. The intervention was administered during gestational
weeks 14–25. The intervention group received supervised resistance exercise
twice a week, performed at an activity level equivalent to within moderate-tovigorous (n = 51). The control group received generalized exercise recommendation, a home-based training program and a telephone follow up (n = 41).
Main outcome measures. Health-related quality of life, physical strength, pain,
weight, blood pressure, functional status, activity level, and perinatal data.
Results. Functional status deteriorated during the intervention in both groups
and pain increased. Significant differences between the groups were obtained
only for birthweight. Newborns delivered by women who underwent resistance
exercise during pregnancy were significantly heavier than those born to control
women; 3561 (452) g vs. 3251 (437) g (p = 0.02), a difference that disappeared when adjustment was made for gestational age (p = 0.059). Both groups
showed normal health-related quality of life, blood pressure, and perinatal data.
Conclusions. These findings indicate that supervised, moderate-to-vigorous
resistance exercise does not jeopardize the health status of healthy pregnant
women or the fetus during pregnancy, but instead appears to be an appropriate
form of exercise in healthy pregnancy.
BP, blood pressure; DRI, disability rating index; GDM,
gestational diabetes mellitus; HRQoL, health-related quality of life; RCT,
randomized controlled trials; SF-36, Short Form-36 Health Survey.
Abbreviations:
Introduction
Maintaining a physically active lifestyle is associated with
many benefits, including lower risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, hypertension, some types of cancer, and
depression (1). Exercise is defined as a planned, structured, and repetitive subset of physical activity that
improves or maintains physical fitness, overall health or
well-being as an intended intermediate or final objective
(2). Pregnant, healthy women are recommended to do
30 min or more of light to moderate exercise a day on
most, if not all, days of the week (3,4). Exercise during
pregnancy is associated with reduced back pain (5),
improved health perception (6), and weight gain control
Key Message
Supervised regular, moderate-to-vigorous resistance
exercise has no adverse effect on childbirth outcome,
pain, or blood pressure. Further investigation into the
use of resistance exercise during pregnancy is needed.
ª 2014 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 94 (2015) 35–42
35
Resistance exercise during pregnancy
(7). In the literature investigations have reported on the
effect of aerobic exercise when adopted in pregnancy.
Only a few randomized controlled trials (RCT) have,
however, examined the efficacy and safety of resistance
exercise during pregnancy (8–10). One study found resistance exercise performed with an elastic band effective in
improving glycaemic control in women with gestation
diabetes mellitus (GDM) (9). No adverse impact on the
delivery (10), or the newborn has been seen (8). Hence,
in their review Nascimento et al. (11) suggested adding
resistance exercise to the exercise recommendations.
Although the exercise recommendations do not provide
specific guidance for vigorous intensity exercise (3,4), Nascimento et al. (11) suggested that their results supported
the promotion of moderate-to-vigorous prenatal exercise.
Ruchat et al. (12) concluded that a walking program of
vigorous intensity is safe and beneficial to both the
mother and fetus, and also promotes decline in glucose
concentrations among women at risk of GDM (13). In a
prospective study Jukic et al. found an association
between first-trimester vigorous exercise and longer gestation, and reduced risk of preterm births (14). To the best
of our knowledge, no RCT has been conducted that studies prenatal resistance exercise at moderate-to-vigorous
intensity.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the health effect
and safety of moderate-to-vigorous intensity resistance
exercise when free weights are used by healthy women
during pregnancy, with regard to health-related quality of
life (HRQoL), pain location, physical strength, body
weight gain, blood pressure (BP), functional status, activity level, and childbirth outcomes.
Material and methods
Participants for this study were recruited from February
2006 through November 2006, and from September 2008
through April 2009, all from two antenatal clinics in
Gothenburg, Sweden. Background variables did not significantly differ in between the two study periods. The
participants were verbally informed about the study by
midwives or they received written information available
at the antenatal clinic. Those interested in participating
contacted the research coordinator. The criteria of inclusion were: (i) Pregnancy
Purchase answer to see full
attachment