Gestational weight gain and pregnancy outcomes in obese women - How much is enough?
ABSTRACT To examine the effect of gestational weight change on pregnancy outcomes in obese women.
A population-based cohort study of 120,251 pregnant, obese women delivering full-term, liveborn, singleton infants was examined to assess the risk of four pregnancy outcomes (preeclampsia, cesarean delivery, small for gestational age births, and large for gestational age births) by obesity class and total gestational weight gain.
Gestational weight gain incidence for overweight or obese pregnant women, less than the currently recommended 15 lb, was associated with a significantly lower risk of preeclampsia, cesarean delivery, and large for gestational age birth and higher risk of small for gestational age birth. These results were similar for each National Institutes of Health obesity class (30-34.9, 35-35.9, and 40.0 kg/m(2)), but at different amounts of gestational weight gain.
Limited or no weight gain in obese pregnant women has favorable pregnancy outcomes.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We aimed to examine whether women who adhered to Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines for gestational weight gain (GWG) had improved perinatal outcomes. This is a population-based retrospective cohort study of nulliparous women with term singleton vertex births in the United States from 2011 through 2012. Women with medical or obstetric complications were excluded. Prepregnancy body mass index was calculated using reported weight and height. Women were categorized into 4 groups based on GWG and prepregnancy body mass index: (1) weight gain less than, (2) weight gain within, (3) weight gain 1-19 lb in excess of, and (4) weight gain ≥20 lb in excess of the IOM guidelines. The χ(2) test and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used for statistical comparisons. Compared to women who had GWG within the IOM guidelines, women with excessive weight gain, particularly ≥20 lb, were more likely to have adverse maternal outcomes (preeclampsia: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.82-2.93; eclampsia: aOR, 2.51; 95% CI, 2.27-2.78; cesarean: aOR, 2.1; 95% CI, 2.14-2.19), blood transfusion (aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.11-1.33), and neonatal outcomes (5-minute Apgar <4: aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.14-1.31; ventilation use >6 hours: aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.15-1.33; seizure: aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.24-1.89). Women who gained less than IOM guidelines had lower risks of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and obstetric interventions but were more likely to have small-for-gestational-age neonates (aOR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.52-1.59). Women whose GWG is in excess of IOM guidelines have higher risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, particularly in women with ≥20 lb excess weight gain above guidelines while women who had weight gain below the IOM guidelines were less likely to have maternal morbidity but had higher odds of small for gestational age. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The significant impact of physical activity during, or immediately prior to pregnancy on a range of pregnancy and birth outcomes has been established. However, lifecourse theory posits that the antecedents of poor outcomes occur across a larger trajectory of time. The objective of this study was to examine whether physical activity patterns over the lifecourse impact birth outcomes. The sample (n = 1,713) was derived from Waves I, III, and IV of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health and limited to women who had their first, singleton live birth between Waves III and IV; respondents who had missing data were excluded. Outcome variables included preterm birth (<37 weeks) and low birth weight (<5.5 pounds). Physical activity was categorized as follows: long-term physically active (active at Waves I and III); short-term physically active (active at only Wave I or III); and not physically active (not active at Waves I and III). Survey-weighted logistic regression controlled for socio-demographic and established predictors of poor birth outcomes. Women categorized as long-term physically active had lower rates of preterm births (12.2 vs. 18.7 %) and low birth weight (9.1 vs. 11.1 %) compared to women categorized as not physically active. However, when controlling for covariates, adjusted analysis revealed that physical activity consistency only predicted preterm birth (aOR = 0.55, 95 % CI = 0.33-0.91). Findings suggest that physical activity patterns across the lifecourse may decrease risk of preterm birth. Implications include efforts supporting patterns of physical activity over longer periods of time prior to pregnancy.Maternal and Child Health Journal 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10995-015-1691-4 · 2.24 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A systematic review was conducted to determine the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes with gestational weight gain (GWG) below the 2009 Institute of Medicine guidelines compared with within the guidelines in obese women. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Register, CINHAL and Web of Science were searched from 1 January 2009 to 31 July 2014. Quality was assessed using a modified Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Three primary outcomes were included: preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA) and large for gestational age (LGA). Eighteen cohort studies were included. GWG below the guidelines had higher odds of preterm birth (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07–2.00) and SGA (AOR 1.24; 95% CI 1.13–1.36) and lower odds of LGA (AOR 0.77; 95% CI 0.73–0.81) than GWG within the guidelines. Across the three obesity classes, the odds of SGA and LGA did not show any notable gradient and remained unexplored for preterm birth. Decreased odds were noted for macrosomia (AOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.54–0.77), gestational hypertension (AOR, 0.70; 95% CI 0.53–0.93), pre-eclampsia (AOR 0.90; 95% CI 0.82–0.99) and caesarean (AOR 0.87; 95% CI 0.82–0.92). GWG below the guidelines cannot be routinely recommended but might occasionally be individualized for certain women, with caution, taking into account other known risk factors.Obesity Reviews 02/2015; 16(3). DOI:10.1111/obr.12238 · 7.86 Impact Factor