Journal of Pregnancy and Child Health
Open Access

Pregnancy; Exercise; Macrosomia; Fitness; Obesity

Introduction

Over the past 20 years, the average birthweight of newborns born in the US has grown [1]. Because of different growth trajectories brought on by higher birthweight, neonates are more likely to become obese as adults and develop the corresponding cardio-metabolic morbidities [2]. The strongest indicator of foetal growth is intrauterine energy supply, which when in excess causes macrosomia and greater infant birthweights [3]. An important factor in determining the amount of energy provided to the foetus is maternal metabolic regulation, which is defined as control of the blood sugar and lipid levels that are circulated [4]. The delivery of more energy and foetal expansion come from any failure in metabolic regulation. Moreover, it is also well known that maternal body mass is significantly and favourably connected to the birth weight and adiposity of the kids [5]. Mothers who are overweight or obese are more likely to give birth to larger children. This connection is thought to be caused by diminished mother metabolic regulation, which results in increased foetal energy supply and larger birthweight babies [6]. The study of variables that may enable these women to control the quantity of nutrient-energy provided to the foetus is essential for the health of her offspring because, at the moment, about 50% of women of reproductive age are OW/OB [7]. Significant scientific data among non-pregnant populations shows that physical activity and cardiorespiratory fitness display protective effects on a number of cardio-metabolic health outcomes [8]. The improvements in metabolic health are the cause of this. It's noteworthy that these potent benefits continue even when there is excess adiposity [9]. The increased incidence of poor cardio-metabolic health outcomes among OW/OB people may not be due to their excess adiposity per se, but rather to their lower levels of CRF and PA, according to a new discovery [10].

Discussion

We previously hypothesised that this identical mechanism occurs during pregnancy, where lower maternal PA and CRF levels, particularly in OW/OB women, reduce metabolic health, increase energy supply, and cause a larger neonate. All of this points to the possibility that adequate amounts of maternal PA and CRF may be able to "normalise" the quantity of nutrient-energy accessible to the foetus, hence encouraging healthy foetal growth. Many research examined the effects of maternal PA and CRF on various maternal-infant health outcomes during the prenatal period. Many investigations looked at the effects of PA a significant protective impact of PA on birthweight was shown in a recent evaluation of activity intervention trials, which focused on foetal growth. Nevertheless, this conclusion only related to pregnant NW women; OW/OB women showed no difference. The latter finding might be primarily attributable to a dearth of thorough intervention trials conducted within this subpopulation. On the other hand, fewer researches have examined the impact of maternal CRF on infant growth. The available studies concentrated on how the maternal CRF changed as the gestational age increased and in response to exercise training (Pavarini et al., 1993). As a result, there is little and conflicting scientific information about how CRF affects birthweight, with reports from earlier studies indicating either favourable, negative, or no results. McKenzie and Wong. It's significant that no research on this association among expectant OW/OB women has been done. The impact of CRF and PA on birthweight in pregnant women who are overweight or obese is still poorly understood, necessitating more research. So, the ultimate goal of this study was to look into the connections between birthweight and maternal PA and CRF during the prenatal period. By assessing the separate and combined effects of PA and CRF on birthweight, we met the study's objectives. Using information from a randomised exercise intervention trial that was executed on a sample of OW/OB pregnant women, we did a secondary data analysis. Among pregnant women of normal weight, prenatal exercise lowers the risk of giving birth to infants weighing less than 4000 g, although the data on the effect of maternal cardiorespiratory fitness on birthweight is still unclear in the case of pregnant women who are overweight or obese. The goal of this study was to assess the connection between OW/OB pregnant women's prenatal maternal PA and CRF and birthweight. Using sedentary, OW/OB pregnant women's data from a randomised controlled exercise intervention experiment. Analyses were performed on women (n = 89) who had complete data on birthweight, peak oxygen consumption (at 17 weeks), and daily PA. Using multiple linear regression models that account for gestational age, weight increase, and group assignment, it was possible to identify the separate and combined relationships of maternal PA and CRF with birthweight. In pregnant OW/OB women, maternal PA and CRF were not associated with birthweight.

Conclusion

The lack of results in this trial may be explained by the low dose of PA, poor maternal PA and CRF variability. Further study is required because there are so few studies that look at these links in pregnant OW/OB women. Using information from a randomised exercise comparison experiment that was conducted between November 2001 and July 2006, the current investigation used a prospective design. Simply stated, the trial's main goal was to investigate the benefits of moderate exercise on preeclampsia incidence and pathophysiological progression in pregnant women. Maternal weight gain and birth outcomes were secondary outcomes. Nine prenatal clinics and two medical care systems recruited pregnant mothers in throughout Michigan. Women who were weeks pregnant, 2 diagnosed with preeclampsia in a prior pregnancy, self-reported poor fitness oxygen consumption % engagement in a sedentary lifestyle, or PA energy expenditure of kcals per day were eligible to take part in the exercise experiment. Chronic hypertension or pre-gestational diabetes, two medical conditions or physical restrictions preventing exercise, three doctor orders forbidding prenatal exercise, or four low mental acuity or a language barrier preventing effective communication with research staff were exclusion criteria for the exercise trial. Of the 210 women who consented to take part in the study, several did not match the requirements. The remaining 124 qualified individuals were randomised to either the intervention group or the control group. The walking programme was the intervention strategy. Members of this group were directed to walk at a moderate intensity maximum heart rate for 40 minutes, five days each week. However, the women were told not to exceed a 10% increase in resting heart rate. Participants in the comparison group underwent a stretching programme with the same frequency and length as the walking group. Ladies also taped themselves stretching their bodies. To verify that they were following the walking or stretching programmes, each participant wore a Polar S810 heart rate monitor and wristwatch. There are other places where you can find more information on the comparison and intervention groups. The data were collapsed for this study across both groups, and group allocation was taken into account in the analyses. The newborn's weight at delivery, expressed in grammes, was referred to as the infant's birthweight. We took information on birthweight from the moms' medical files. The participants' waists were used to quantify daily PA using a pedometer that was fastened to an elastic belt. The participants were told to take the pedometer off for sleep and any water-based activities, and to wear it just when they were awake. The participants were also instructed to record their daily step totals in a log. During 18 weeks of pregnancy, the participants received their pedometers, which they then collected at the conclusion of pregnancy. For the purpose of this study, each participant's total daily step counts were averaged over all of their accessible days.

Acknowledgement

None

Conflict of Interest

None

1. Branco M (2013) Kinematic analysis of gait in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. J Pregnancy 2013.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Gilleard WL (2013) Trunk motion and gait characteristics of pregnant women when walking: Report of a longitudinal study with a control group. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 13.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Betsch M (2015) Spinal posture and pelvic position during pregnancy: a prospective rasterstereographic pilot study. Eur Spine J 24: 1282-1288.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Zhang Y (2015) Characteristics of the centre of pressure progression for pregnant women during walking. Int J Biomed Eng Tech 17: 387-397.

Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Branco M (2016) Kinetic Analysis of Gait in the Second and Third Trimesters of Pregnancy. J Mech Med Biol 16: 1650055.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Sunaga Y (2016) Estimation of inertial parameters of the lower trunk in pregnant Japanese women: A longitudinal comparative study and application to motion analysis. Appl Ergon 55: 173-182.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Forczek W (2019) Does the first trimester of pregnancy induce alterations in the walking pattern? PLoS ONE 14: e0209766

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Bey ME (2019) Vastus Lateralis Architecture Changes During Pregnancy, A Longitudinal Study. Front Physiol 10.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Visser M (2005) Muscle Mass, Muscle Strength, and Muscle Fat Infiltration as Predictors of Incident Mobility Limitations in Well-Functioning Older Persons. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 60: 324-333.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Ma LL, Wang YY, Yang ZH, Huang D, Weng H, et al. (2020) Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? Military Medical Research 7: 1-11.

Google Scholar