Ruben Barakat1, Maria Perales, Yaiza Cordero, Mariano Bacchi, Michelle F Mottola. 1. 1AFIPE Research Group, Technical University of Madrid, Madrid, SPAIN; 2Research Institute Hospital 12 de Octubre ('i+12'), Madrid, SPAIN; 3Physical Activity and Sport Science Faculty, Catholic University of Murcia, Murcia, SPAIN; 4Faculty of Physical Activity and Sports, Flores University, Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA; and 5R. Samuel McLaughlin Foundation-Exercise and Pregnancy Laboratory, School of Kinesiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Children's Health Research Institute, University of Western Ontario, London, CANADA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the cross-sectional results from three experimental studies conducted on land, in water, and in mixed form (land + water) during pregnancy on maternal and newborn outcomes. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used to analyze the results of three randomized clinical trials in healthy pregnant women from Madrid (Spain) and Buenos Aires (Argentina). Five hundred and sixty-eight pregnant women were recruited. For each of the studies, the number of women in the exercise group totaled 107 for study 1 (land), 49 women for study 2 (water), and 101 women for study 3 (land + water). A total of 311 women represented the control group (CG) (pooled together from all three studies). RESULTS: Total maternal weight gain was different between study 1 and CG (11.7 vs 13.4 kg, P = 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.38) as well as the percentage of pregnant women with excessive weight gain (20.6%, n = 22, vs 37.9%, n = 118, respectively, P = 0.005, χ = 16.6, OR = 0.42, 95% confidence interval = 0.25-0.71). The number of pregnant women with gestational diabetes in CG was significantly higher than that in studies 2 and 3 (CG n = 22/7.1%; study 2, n = 0/0%; and study 3, n = 1/1%; P = 0.03, χ = 8.9). CONCLUSION: Exercise performed on land is more effective than aquatic activities in preventing excessive maternal weight gain, whereas combined programs (land + aquatic) or water exercise programs may be more effective in preventing gestational diabetes.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the cross-sectional results from three experimental studies conducted on land, in water, and in mixed form (land + water) during pregnancy on maternal and newborn outcomes. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used to analyze the results of three randomized clinical trials in healthy pregnant women from Madrid (Spain) and Buenos Aires (Argentina). Five hundred and sixty-eight pregnant women were recruited. For each of the studies, the number of women in the exercise group totaled 107 for study 1 (land), 49 women for study 2 (water), and 101 women for study 3 (land + water). A total of 311 women represented the control group (CG) (pooled together from all three studies). RESULTS: Total maternal weight gain was different between study 1 and CG (11.7 vs 13.4 kg, P = 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.38) as well as the percentage of pregnant women with excessive weight gain (20.6%, n = 22, vs 37.9%, n = 118, respectively, P = 0.005, χ = 16.6, OR = 0.42, 95% confidence interval = 0.25-0.71). The number of pregnant women with gestational diabetes in CG was significantly higher than that in studies 2 and 3 (CG n = 22/7.1%; study 2, n = 0/0%; and study 3, n = 1/1%; P = 0.03, χ = 8.9). CONCLUSION: Exercise performed on land is more effective than aquatic activities in preventing excessive maternal weight gain, whereas combined programs (land + aquatic) or water exercise programs may be more effective in preventing gestational diabetes.
Authors: Eduardo F Sanches; Yohan Van de Looij; Audrey Toulotte; Analina R da Silva; Jacqueline Romero; Stephane V Sizonenko Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2018-06-25 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Caroline Borup Roland; Signe de Place Knudsen; Saud Abdulaziz Alomairah; Anne Dsane Andersen; Jane Bendix; Tine D Clausen; Stig Molsted; Andreas Kryger Jensen; Grete Teilmann; Astrid Pernille Jespersen; Jakob Eg Larsen; Gerrit van Hall; Emil Andersen; Romain Barrès; Ole Hartvig Mortensen; Helle Terkildsen Maindal; Lise Tarnow; Ellen Christine Leth Løkkegaard; Bente Stallknecht Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Sávio F Camargo; Juliana D Camargo; Daniel Schwade; Raíssa M Silva; Maria da Conceição M Cornetta; Ricardo N Cobucci; Eduardo C Costa Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-27 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Bruna B Catinelli; Patrícia S Rossignoli; Juliana F Floriano; Aline M Carr; Rafael G de Oliveira; Nilton J Dos Santos; Lara C C Úbeda; Maria Angélica Spadella; Raghavendra L S Hallur; Luis Sobrevia; Sérgio L Felisbino; Iracema M P Calderon; Angélica M P Barbosa; Marilza V C Rudge Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-05-05 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Signe de Place Knudsen; Saud Abdulaziz Alomairah; Caroline Borup Roland; Anne Dsane Jessen; Ida-Marie Hergel; Tine D Clausen; Jakob Eg Larsen; Gerrit van Hall; Andreas Kryger Jensen; Stig Molsted; Jane M Bendix; Ellen Løkkegaard; Bente Stallknecht Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 7.076
Authors: Araceli Navas; María Del Carmen Carrascosa; Catalina Artigues; Silvia Ortas; Elena Portells; Aina Soler; Aina M Yañez; Miquel Bennasar-Veny; Alfonso Leiva Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-05-30 Impact factor: 4.241