Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundClinical guidelines recommend pregnant women without contraindication engage in regular physical activity. This is based on extensive evidence demonstrating the safety and benefits of prenatal exercise. However, certain medical conditions or contraindications warrant a reduction, modification or cessation of activity due to potential health risks.AimTo review and evaluate the evidence related to medical disorders which may warrant contraindication to prenatal exercise.MethodsOnline databases were searched up to 5 April 2019. Forty-four unique studies that reported data on our Population (pregnant women with contraindication to exercise), Intervention (subjective/objective measures of acute or chronic exercise), Comparator (not essential) and Outcomes (adverse maternal or fetal outcomes) were included in the review.Key findingsWe found that the majority of medical conditions listed as contraindications were based on expert opinion; there is minimal empirical evidence to demonstrate harm of exercise and benefit of activity restriction. We identified 11 complications (eg, gestational hypertension, twin pregnancy) previously classified as contraindications where women may in fact benefit from regular prenatal physical activity with or without modifications. However, the evidence suggests that severe cardiorespiratory disease, placental abruption, vasa previa, uncontrolled type 1 diabetes, intrauterine growth restriction, active preterm labour, severe pre-eclampsia and cervical insufficiency are associated with strong potential for maternal/fetal harm and warrant classification as absolute contraindications.ConclusionBased on empirical evidence, we provide a call to re-evaluate clinical guidelines related to medical disorders that have previously been considered contraindications to prenatal exercise. Removing barriers to physical activity during pregnancy for women with certain medical conditions may in fact be beneficial for maternal–fetal health outcomes.

ObjectiveGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), gestational hypertension (GH) and pre-eclampsia (PE) are associated with short and long-term health issues for mother and child; prevention of these complications is critically important. This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationships between prenatal exercise and GDM, GH and PE.DesignSystematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data sourcesOnline databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study eligibility criteriaStudies of all designs were included (except case studies) if published in English, Spanish or French, and contained information on the Population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), Intervention (subjective or objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise, alone [“exercise-only”] or in combination with other intervention components [e.g., dietary; “exercise + co-intervention”]), Comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and Outcomes (GDM, GH, PE).ResultsA total of 106 studies (n=273 182) were included. ‘Moderate’ to ‘high’-quality evidence from randomised controlled trials revealed that exercise-only interventions, but not exercise+cointerventions, reduced odds of GDM (n=6934; OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.75), GH (n=5316; OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.85) and PE (n=3322; OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.9) compared with no exercise. To achieve at least a 25% reduction in the odds of developing GDM, PE and GH, pregnant women need to accumulate at least 600 MET-min/week of moderate-intensity exercise (eg, 140 min of brisk walking, water aerobics, stationary cycling or resistance training).Summary/conclusionsIn conclusion, exercise-only interventions were effective at lowering the odds of developing GDM, GH and PE.

ObjectiveGestational weight gain (GWG) has been identified as a critical modifier of maternal and fetal health. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the relationship between prenatal exercise, GWG and postpartum weight retention (PPWR).DesignSystematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. Online databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study eligibility criteriaStudies of all designs in English, Spanish or French were eligible (except case studies and reviews) if they contained information on the population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), intervention (frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise, alone [“exercise-only”] or in combination with other intervention components [eg, dietary; “exercise + co-intervention”]), comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise) and outcomes (GWG, excessive GWG (EGWG), inadequate GWG (IGWG) or PPWR).ResultsEighty-four unique studies (n=21 530) were included. ‘Low’ to ‘moderate’ quality evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed that exercise-only interventions decreased total GWG (n=5819; −0.9 kg, 95% CI −1.23 to –0.57 kg, I2=52%) and PPWR (n=420; −0.92 kg, 95% CI −1.84 to 0.00 kg, I2=0%) and reduced the odds of EGWG (n=3519; OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.80, I2=12%) compared with no exercise. ‘High’ quality evidence indicated higher odds of IGWG with prenatal exercise-only (n=1628; OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.67, I2=0%) compared with no exercise.ConclusionsPrenatal exercise reduced the odds of EGWG and PPWR but increased the risk of IGWG. However, the latter result should be interpreted with caution because it was based on a limited number of studies (five RCTs).

Depression and anxiety affect one in seven women during the perinatal period, and are associated with increased risk of preterm delivery, reduced mother-infant bonding, and delays in cognitive/emotional development of the infant. With this survey we aimed to rapidly assess the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent physical distancing/isolation measures on the mental health and physical activity of pregnant and postpartum women. Between April 14 and May 8, 2020, we recruited women who were pregnant or within the first year after delivery to participate in an online survey. This included questionnaires on self-reported levels of depression/depressive symptoms (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Survey; EPDS), anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; STAI-State), and physical activity. Current and pre-pandemic values were assessed for each. Of 900 eligible women, 520 (58%) were pregnant and 380 (42%) were in the first year after delivery. Sixty-four percent of women reported reduced physical activity with the onset of isolation measures, while 15% increased, and 21% had no change to their physical activity. An EPDS score >13 (indicative of depression) was self-identified in 15% of respondents pre-pandemic and in 40.7% currently (mean ± SD; 7.5 ± 4.9 vs. 11.2 ± 6.3, respectively; < 0.01, moderate effect). Moderate to high anxiety (STAI-state score >40) was identified in 29% of women before the pandemic (mean STAI = 34.5 ± 11.4) vs. 72% of women currently (mean STAI = 48.1 ± 13.6; < 0.01, large effect). However, women engaging in at least 150 min of moderate intensity physical activity (meeting current guidelines) during the pandemic had significantly lower scores for both anxiety and depression than those who did not ( < 0.01, large and small effect, respectively). This rapid response survey identifies a substantial increase in the likelihood of maternal depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. This highlights the strong need for heightened assessment and treatment of maternal mental health. However, these data also suggest that physical activity, which has previously been shown to reduce depression and depressive symptoms in pregnancy, may be associated with better mental health during the pandemic.

ObjectiveCardiac output, a fundamental parameter of cardiovascular function, has consistently been shown to increase across healthy pregnancy; however, the time course and magnitude of adaptation remains equivocal within published literature. The aim of the present meta-analyses was to comprehensively describe the pattern of change in cardiac output during healthy pregnancy.MethodA series of meta-analyses of previously published cardiac output data during healthy, singleton pregnancies was completed. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for studies published between 1996 and 2014. Included studies reported absolute values during a predetermined gestational age (non-pregnant, late first trimester, early and late second trimester, early and late third trimester, early and late postpartum). Cardiac output was measured through echocardiography, impedance cardiography or inert gas rebreathing. Observational data were meta-analysed at each gestational age using a random-effects model. If reported, related haemodynamic variables were evaluated.ResultsIn total, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion, with pooled sample sizes ranging from 259 to 748. Cardiac output increased during pregnancy reaching its peak in the early third trimester, 1.5 L/min (31%) above non-pregnant values. The observed results from this study indicated a non-linear rise to this point. In the early postpartum, cardiac output had returned to non-pregnant values.ConclusionThe present results suggest that cardiac output peaks in the early third trimester, following a non-linear pattern of adaptation; however, this must be confirmed using longitudinal studies. The findings provide new insight into the normal progression of cardiac output during pregnancy.

ObjectiveThe purpose of this review was to investigate the relationship between prenatal exercise, and low back (LBP), pelvic girdle (PGP) and lumbopelvic (LBPP) pain.DesignSystematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data sourcesOnline databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study eligibility criteriaStudies of all designs were eligible (except case studies and reviews) if they were published in English, Spanish or French, and contained information on the population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), intervention (subjective or objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise, alone [“exercise-only”] or in combination with other intervention components [eg, dietary; “exercise + co-intervention”]), comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and outcome (prevalence and symptom severity of LBP, PGP and LBPP).ResultsThe analyses included data from 32 studies (n=52 297 pregnant women). ‘Very low’ to ‘moderate’ quality evidence from 13 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed prenatal exercise did not reduce the odds of suffering from LBP, PGP and LBPP either in pregnancy or the postpartum period. However, ‘very low’ to ‘moderate’ quality evidence from 15 RCTs identified lower pain severity during pregnancy and the early postpartum period in women who exercised during pregnancy (standardised mean difference −1.03, 95% CI −1.58, –0.48) compared with those who did not exercise. These findings were supported by ‘very low’ quality evidence from other study designs.ConclusionCompared with not exercising, prenatal exercise decreased the severity of LBP, PGP or LBPP during and following pregnancy but did not decrease the odds of any of these conditions at any time point.

ObjectiveWe aimed to identify the relationship between maternal prenatal exercise and birth complications, and neonatal and childhood morphometric, metabolic and developmental outcomes.DesignSystematic review with random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data sourcesOnline databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study eligibility criteriaStudies of all designs were eligible (except case studies and reviews) if published in English, Spanish or French, and contained information on the relevant population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), intervention (subjective/objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise, alone (‘exercise-only’) or in combination with other intervention components (eg, dietary; ‘exercise+cointervention’)), comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume, type or trimester of exercise) and outcomes (preterm birth, gestational age at delivery, birth weight, low birth weight (<2500 g), high birth weight (>4000 g), small for gestational age, large for gestational age, intrauterine growth restriction, neonatal hypoglycaemia, metabolic acidosis (cord blood pH, base excess), hyperbilirubinaemia, Apgar scores, neonatal intensive care unit admittance, shoulder dystocia, brachial plexus injury, neonatal body composition (per cent body fat, body weight, body mass index (BMI), ponderal index), childhood obesity (per cent body fat, body weight, BMI) and developmental milestones (including cognitive, psychosocial, motor skills)).ResultsA total of 135 studies (n=166 094) were included. There was ‘high’ quality evidence from exercise-only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showing a 39% reduction in the odds of having a baby >4000 g (macrosomia: 15 RCTs, n=3670; OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.92) in women who exercised compared with women who did not exercise, without affecting the odds of growth-restricted, preterm or low birth weight babies. Prenatal exercise was not associated with the other neonatal or infant outcomes that were examined.ConclusionsPrenatal exercise is safe and beneficial for the fetus. Maternal exercise was associated with reduced odds of macrosomia (abnormally large babies) and was not associated with neonatal complications or adverse childhood outcomes.

ObjectiveTo examine the influence of prenatal exercise on depression and anxiety during pregnancy and the postpartum period.DesignSystematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data sourcesOnline databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study eligibility criteriaStudies of all designs were included (except case studies) if they were published in English, Spanish or French and contained information on the Population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), Intervention (subjective or objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise), Comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and Outcome (prenatal or postnatal depression or anxiety).ResultsA total of 52 studies (n=131 406) were included. ‘Moderate’ quality evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) revealed that exercise-only interventions, but not exercise+cointerventions, reduced the severity of prenatal depressive symptoms (13 RCTs, n=1076; standardised mean difference: −0.38, 95% CI −0.51 to –0.25, I2=10%) and the odds of prenatal depression by 67% (5 RCTs, n=683; OR: 0.33, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.53, I2=0%) compared with no exercise. Prenatal exercise did not alter the odds of postpartum depression or the severity of depressive symptoms, nor anxiety or anxiety symptoms during or following pregnancy. To achieve at least a moderate effect size in the reduction of the severity of prenatal depressive symptoms, pregnant women needed to accumulate at least 644 MET-min/week of exercise (eg, 150 min of moderate intensity exercise, such as brisk walking, water aerobics, stationary cycling, resistance training).Summary/ConclusionsPrenatal exercise reduced the odds and severity of prenatal depression.

ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review of the relationships between prenatal exercise and maternal harms including labour/delivery outcomes.DesignSystematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.DatasourcesOnline databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study eligibility criteriaStudies of all designs were included (except case studies) if they were published in English, Spanish or French and contained information on the population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), intervention (subjective or objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise), comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise, alone [“exercise-only”] or in combination with other intervention components [e.g., dietary; “exercise + co-intervention”]) and outcome (preterm/prelabour rupture of membranes, caesarean section, instrumental delivery, induction of labour, length of labour, vaginal tears, fatigue, injury, musculoskeletal trauma, maternal harms (author defined) and diastasis recti).Results113 studies (n=52 858 women) were included. ‘Moderate’ quality evidence from exercise-only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicated a 24% reduction in the odds of instrumental delivery in women who exercised compared with women who did not (20 RCTs, n=3819; OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.92, I 2= 0 %). The remaining outcomes were not associated with exercise. Results from meta-regression did not identify a dose–response relationship between frequency, intensity, duration or volume of exercise and labour and delivery outcomes.Summary/conclusionsPrenatal exercise reduced the odds of instrumental delivery in the general obstetrical population. There was no relationship between prenatal exercise and preterm/prelabour rupture of membranes, caesarean section, induction of labour, length of labour, vaginal tears, fatigue, injury, musculoskeletal trauma, maternal harms and diastasis recti.

ObjectiveTo examine the relationships between prenatal physical activity and prenatal and postnatal urinary incontinence (UI).DesignSystematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data sourcesOnline databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study eligibility criteriaStudies of all designs were included (except case studies) if they were published in English, Spanish or French and contained information on the Population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), Intervention (subjective or objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise, alone [“exercise-only”] or in combination with other intervention components [e.g., dietary; “exercise + co-intervention”]), Comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and Outcome (prenatal or postnatal UI).Results24 studies (n=15 982 women) were included. ‘Low’ to ‘moderate’ quality evidence revealed prenatal pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) with or without aerobic exercise decreased the odds of UI in pregnancy (15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), n=2764 women; OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.68, I2=60%) and in the postpartum period (10 RCTs, n=1682 women; OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51, 0.79, I2=0%). When we analysed the data by whether women were continent or incontinent prior to the intervention, exercise was beneficial at preventing the development of UI in women with continence, but not effective in treating UI in women with incontinence. There was ‘low’ quality evidence that prenatal exercise had a moderate effect in the reduction of UI symptom severity during (five RCTs, standard mean difference (SMD) −0.54, 95% CI −0.88 to –0.20, I2=64%) and following pregnancy (three RCTs, ‘moderate’ quality evidence; SMD −0.54, 95% CI −0.87 to –0.22, I2=24%).ConclusionPrenatal exercise including PFMT reduced the odds and symptom severity of prenatal and postnatal UI. This was the case for women who were continent before the intervention. Among women who were incontinent during pregnancy, exercise training was not therapeutic.