Regular exercise during pregnancy to prevent gestational diabetes: a randomized controlled trial

Perinatal exercise improves glucose homeostasis in adult offspring

Emerging research has shown that subtle factors during pregnancy and gestation can influence long-term health in offspring. In an attempt to be proactive, we set out to explore whether a nonpharmacological intervention, perinatal exercise, might improve offspring health. Female mice were separated into sedentary or exercise cohorts, with the exercise cohort having voluntary access to a running wheel prior to mating and during pregnancy and nursing. Offspring were weaned, and analyses were performed on the mature offspring that did not have access to running wheels during any portion of their lives. Perinatal exercise caused improved glucose disposal following an oral glucose challenge in both female and male adult offspring (P < 0.05 for both). Blood glucose concentrations were reduced to lower values in response to an intraperitoneal insulin tolerance test for both female and male adult offspring of parents with access to running wheels (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively). Male offspring from exercised dams showed increased percent lean mass and decreased fat mass percent compared with male offspring from sedentary dams (P < 0.01 for both), but these parameters were unchanged in female offspring. These data suggest that short-term maternal voluntary exercise prior to and during healthy pregnancy and nursing can enhance long-term glucose homeostasis in offspring.

Exercise for pregnant women for preventing gestational diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) affects a significant number of women each year. GDM is associated with a wide range of adverse outcomes for women and their babies. Recent observational studies have found physical activity during normal pregnancy decreases insulin resistance and therefore might help to decrease the risk of developing GDM.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of physical exercise for pregnant women for preventing glucose intolerance or GDM.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (2 April 2012), ClinicalTrials.gov (2 April 2012) and the WOMBAT Perinatal Trials Registry (2 April 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and cluster-randomised trials assessing the effects of exercise for preventing pregnancy glucose intolerance or GDM.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials with a total of 1115 women and their babies (922 women and their babies contributed outcome data). Four of the five included trials had small sample sizes with one large trial that recruited 855 women and babies. All five included trials had a moderate risk of bias. When comparing women receiving additional exercise interventions with those having routine antenatal care, there was no significant difference in GDM incidence (three trials, 826 women, risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 1.84), caesarean section (two trials, 934 women, RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.84) or operative vaginal birth (two trials, 934 women, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.17). No trial reported the infant primary outcomes prespecified in the review.None of the five included trials found significant differences in insulin sensitivity. Evidence from one single large trial suggested no significant difference in the incidence of developing pregnancy hyperglycaemia not meeting GDM diagnostic criteria, pre-eclampsia or admission to neonatal ward between the two study groups. Babies born to women receiving exercise interventions had a non-significant trend to a lower ponderal index (mean difference (MD) -0.08 gram x 100 m(3), 95% CI -0.18 to 0.02, one trial, 84 infants). No significant differences were seen between the two study groups for the outcomes of birthweight (two trials, 167 infants, MD -102.87 grams, 95% CI -235.34 to 29.60), macrosomia (two trials, 934 infants, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.22), or small-for-gestational age (one trial, 84 infants, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.25 to 4.40) or gestational age at birth (two trials, 167 infants, MD -0.04 weeks, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) or Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (two trials, 919 infants, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.65). None of the trials reported long-term outcomes for women and their babies. No information was available on health services costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited randomised controlled trial evidence available on the effect of exercise during pregnancy for preventing pregnancy glucose intolerance or GDM. Results from three randomised trials with moderate risk of bias suggested no significant difference in GDM incidence between women receiving an additional exercise intervention and routine care.Based on the limited data currently available, conclusive evidence is not available to guide practice. Larger, well-designed randomised trials, with standardised behavioural interventions are needed to assess the effects of exercise on preventing GDM and other adverse pregnancy outcomes including large-for-gestational age and perinatal mortality. Longer-term health outcomes for both women and their babies and health service costs should be included. Several such trials are in progress. We identified another seven trials which are ongoing and we will consider these for inclusion in the next update of this review.

Does regular exercise during pregnancy influence lumbopelvic pain? A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To study lumbopelvic pain in women randomized to a regular exercise program during pregnancy in comparison to women receiving standard antenatal care.

DESIGN

A two-armed, two-center, randomized controlled trial. Setting. St Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital and Stavanger University Hospital.

POPULATION

A total of 855 pregnant women were randomized to intervention or control groups.

METHODS

The intervention was a 12 week exercise program, including aerobic and strengthening exercises, conducted between 20 and 36 weeks of pregnancy. One weekly group session was led by physiotherapists, and home exercises were encouraged twice a week. The control group received standard antenatal care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Self-reports of lumbopelvic pain and sick leave due to lumbopelvic pain. The data were analysed according to the "intention-to-treat" principle.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between groups of women reporting lumbopelvic pain at 36 weeks (74 vs. 75%, p=0.76). The proportion of women on sick leave due to lumbopelvic pain was lower in the intervention group (22% vs 31%, p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise during pregnancy does not influence the prevalence of lumbopelvic pain, but women offered a regular exercise course seem to handle the disorder better.