Linda M Szymanski1, Andrew J Satin. 1. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland 21224, USA. lszymanski@jhmi.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate acute fetal responses to individually prescribed exercise according to existing guidelines (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) in active and inactive pregnant women. METHODS: Forty-five healthy pregnant women (15 nonexercisers, 15 regularly active, 15 highly active) were tested between 28 0/7 and 32 6/7 weeks of gestation. After a treadmill test to volitional fatigue, target heart rates were calculated for two subsequent 30-minute treadmill sessions: 1) moderate intensity (40-59% heart rate reserve); and 2) vigorous intensity (60-84%). All women performed the moderate test; only active women performed the vigorous test. Fetal well-being measures included umbilical artery Dopplers, fetal heart tracing and rate, and biophysical profile. Measures were obtained at rest and immediately postexercise. RESULTS: Groups were similar in age, body mass index, and gestational age. Maternal resting heart rate in the highly active group (61.6 ± 7.2 beats per minute [bpm]) was significantly lower than the nonexercise (79.0 ± 11.6 bpm) and regularly active (71.9 ± 7.4 bpm) groups (P<.001). Treadmill time was longer in highly active (22.3 ± 2.9 minutes) than regularly active (16.6 ± 3.4) and nonexercise (12.1 ± 3.6) groups (P<.001), reflecting higher fitness. With moderate exercise, all umbilical artery Doppler indices were similar pre-exercise and postexercise among groups. With vigorous exercise, Dopplers were similar in regularly and highly active women with statistically significant decreases postexercise (P<.05). The group × time interaction was not significant. Postexercise fetal heart tracings met criteria for reactivity within 20 minutes after all tests. Biophysical profile scores were reassuring. CONCLUSION: This study supports existing guidelines indicating pregnant women may begin or maintain an exercise program at moderate (inactive) or vigorous (active) intensities.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate acute fetal responses to individually prescribed exercise according to existing guidelines (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) in active and inactive pregnant women. METHODS: Forty-five healthy pregnant women (15 nonexercisers, 15 regularly active, 15 highly active) were tested between 28 0/7 and 32 6/7 weeks of gestation. After a treadmill test to volitional fatigue, target heart rates were calculated for two subsequent 30-minute treadmill sessions: 1) moderate intensity (40-59% heart rate reserve); and 2) vigorous intensity (60-84%). All women performed the moderate test; only active women performed the vigorous test. Fetal well-being measures included umbilical artery Dopplers, fetal heart tracing and rate, and biophysical profile. Measures were obtained at rest and immediately postexercise. RESULTS: Groups were similar in age, body mass index, and gestational age. Maternal resting heart rate in the highly active group (61.6 ± 7.2 beats per minute [bpm]) was significantly lower than the nonexercise (79.0 ± 11.6 bpm) and regularly active (71.9 ± 7.4 bpm) groups (P<.001). Treadmill time was longer in highly active (22.3 ± 2.9 minutes) than regularly active (16.6 ± 3.4) and nonexercise (12.1 ± 3.6) groups (P<.001), reflecting higher fitness. With moderate exercise, all umbilical artery Doppler indices were similar pre-exercise and postexercise among groups. With vigorous exercise, Dopplers were similar in regularly and highly active women with statistically significant decreases postexercise (P<.05). The group × time interaction was not significant. Postexercise fetal heart tracings met criteria for reactivity within 20 minutes after all tests. Biophysical profile scores were reassuring. CONCLUSION: This study supports existing guidelines indicating pregnant women may begin or maintain an exercise program at moderate (inactive) or vigorous (active) intensities.
Authors: Michelle F Mottola; Margie H Davenport; Chantale R Brun; Stuart D Inglis; Sarah Charlesworth; Maggie M Sopper Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Jennifer C Dempsey; Tanya K Sorensen; Michelle A Williams; I-Min Lee; Raymond S Miller; Edward E Dashow; David A Luthy Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2004-04-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Daubian-Nosé P; Franco B; De Fante T; Forte Ldm; Manchado-Gobatto F B; Bezerra R M; Manconi M; Torsoni A S; Esteves A M Journal: Biol Trace Elem Res Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 3.738
Authors: Mark L Wahlqvist; Stephen A Krawetz; Nico S Rizzo; Maria Gloria Dominguez-Bello; Linda M Szymanski; Shari Barkin; Ann Yatkine; Robert A Waterland; Julie A Mennella; Mina Desai; Michael G Ross; Nancy F Krebs; Bridget E Young; Jane Wardle; Christiane D Wrann; John G Kral Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 5.691