Search

Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the influence of acute and chronic prenatal exercise on fetal heart rate (FHR) and umbilical and uterine blood flow metrics.Design: Systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data Sources: Online databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study Eligibility Criteria: Studies 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 [eg, dietary; "exercise + co-intervention"]), comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and outcomes (FHR, beats per minute (bpm); uterine and umbilical blood flow metrics (systolic:diastolic (S/D) ratio; Pulsatility Index (PI); Resistance Index (RI); blood flow, mL/min; and blood velocity, cm/s)).Results: 'Very low' to 'moderate' quality evidence from 91 unique studies (n=4641 women) were included. Overall, FHR increased during (mean difference (MD)=6.35bpm; 95% CI 2.30 to 10.41, I2=95%, p=0.002) and following acute exercise (MD=4.05; 95% CI 2.98 to 5.12, I2=83%, p<0.00001). The incidence of fetal bradycardia was low at rest and unchanged with acute exercise. There were no significant changes in umbilical or uterine S/D, PI, RI, blood flow or blood velocity during or following acute exercise sessions. Chronic exercise decreased resting FHR and the umbilical artery S/D, PI and RI at rest.Conclusion: Acute and chronic prenatal exercise do not adversely impact FHR or uteroplacental blood flow metrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the relationships between exercise and incidence of congenital anomalies and hyperthermia.Design: Systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis .Data Sources: Online databases were searched from inception up to 6 January 2017.Study Eligibility Criteria: Studies of all designs were eligible (except case studies and reviews) if they were published in English, Spanish or French, and contained information on 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 or type of exercise) and outcome (maternal temperature and fetal anomalies).Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 'very low' quality evidence from 14 studies (n=78 735) reporting on prenatal exercise and the odds of congenital anomalies, and 'very low' to 'low' quality evidence from 15 studies (n=447) reporting on maternal temperature response to prenatal exercise. Prenatal exercise did not increase the odds of congenital anomalies (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.95, I2=0%). A small but significant increase in maternal temperature was observed from pre-exercise to both during and immediately after exercise (during: 0.26°C, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.40, I2=70%; following: 0.24°C, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.31, I2=47%).Summary/conclusions: These data suggest that moderate-to-vigorous prenatal exercise does not induce hyperthermia or increase the odds of congenital anomalies. However, exercise responses were investigated in most studies after 12 weeks' gestation when the risk of de novo congenital anomalies is negligible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To perform a systematic review of the relationship between prenatal exercise and fetal or newborn death.Design: Systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data Sources: Online databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study Eligibility Criteria: Studies 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 [eg, dietary; "exercise + co-intervention"]), comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and outcome (miscarriage or perinatal mortality).Results: Forty-six studies (n=2 66 778) were included. There was 'very low' quality evidence suggesting no increased odds of miscarriage (23 studies, n=7125 women; OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.21, I2=0%) or perinatal mortality (13 studies, n=6837 women, OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.52, I2=0%) in pregnant women who exercised compared with those who did not. Stratification by subgroups did not affect odds of miscarriage or perinatal mortality. The meta-regressions identified no associations between volume, intensity or frequency of exercise and fetal or newborn death. As the majority of included studies examined the impact of moderate intensity exercise to a maximum duration of 60 min, we cannot comment on the effect of longer periods of exercise.Summary/conclusions: Although the evidence in this field is of 'very low' quality, it suggests that prenatal exercise is not associated with increased odds of miscarriage or perinatal mortality. In plain terms, this suggests that generally speaking exercise is 'safe' with respect to miscarriage and perinatal mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To perform a systematic review of the relationships between prenatal exercise and maternal harms including labour/delivery outcomes.Design: Systematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Datasources: Online databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study Eligibility Criteria: Studies 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).Results: 113 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/conclusions: Prenatal 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this review was to investigate the relationship between prenatal exercise, and low back (LBP), pelvic girdle (PGP) and lumbopelvic (LBPP) pain.Design: Systematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data Sources: Online databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.Study Eligibility Criteria: Studies 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).Results: The 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.Conclusion: Compared 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]