Danielle Symons Downs1,2, Jennifer M Dinallo3, Leann L Birch4, Ian M Paul5, Jan S Ulbrecht6,7. 1. Exercise Psychology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, The Pennsylvania State University. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Pennsylvania State University. 3. Prevention Research Center, The Pennsylvania State University. 4. College of Family and Consumer Sciences, University of Georgia. 5. Department of Pediatrics and Public Health Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University. 6. Mount Nittany Physician Group, State College, Pennsylvania. 7. Departments of Biobehavioral Health and Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Evaluate effects of a theoretically-based, semi-intensive (Face-to-Face; F2F) exercise intervention and minimum-contact (Home) exercise intervention to the standard care (Control) on exercise, its motivational determinants, blood glucose levels, and insulin use of pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). DESIGN: Randomized control trial with two intervention arms and control (standard care). METHOD: Participants (N=65) were randomized to a Control (standard prenatal care/GDM dietary counseling), Home (standard care + phone education/support + home exercise), or F2F (standard care + on-site education/support + guided exercise with instructor on 2 days/week) group from ~20 weeks gestation to delivery. Assessments of exercise and motivational determinants were obtained at baseline (20-weeks gestation) and follow-up (32-weeks gestation). Blood glucose levels (fasting/postprandial mg/dL) and insulin use were extrapolated from medical records. RESULTS: At the 32-week follow-up, the F2F group had significantly higher exercise min, pedometer steps/day, and motivational determinants (attitude, subjective norm, perceived control, intention) than controls (p's < .05) and significantly higher exercise min and subjective norm than the Home group (p's < .05); these effect sizes were medium-large (η2 = .11-.23). There was a medium effect (η2 = .13) on postprandial blood glucose at 36-weeks gestation with the F2F group having lower values than controls. Although not significant, the F2F group started insulin later (33 weeks gestation) than the Home (27 weeks) and Control (31 weeks) groups. CONCLUSION: A theoretically-based, F2F exercise intervention has multiple health benefits and may be the necessary approach for promoting exercise motivation and behavior among GDM women.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: Evaluate effects of a theoretically-based, semi-intensive (Face-to-Face; F2F) exercise intervention and minimum-contact (Home) exercise intervention to the standard care (Control) on exercise, its motivational determinants, blood glucose levels, and insulin use of pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). DESIGN: Randomized control trial with two intervention arms and control (standard care). METHOD:Participants (N=65) were randomized to a Control (standard prenatal care/GDM dietary counseling), Home (standard care + phone education/support + home exercise), or F2F (standard care + on-site education/support + guided exercise with instructor on 2 days/week) group from ~20 weeks gestation to delivery. Assessments of exercise and motivational determinants were obtained at baseline (20-weeks gestation) and follow-up (32-weeks gestation). Blood glucose levels (fasting/postprandial mg/dL) and insulin use were extrapolated from medical records. RESULTS: At the 32-week follow-up, the F2F group had significantly higher exercise min, pedometer steps/day, and motivational determinants (attitude, subjective norm, perceived control, intention) than controls (p's < .05) and significantly higher exercise min and subjective norm than the Home group (p's < .05); these effect sizes were medium-large (η2 = .11-.23). There was a medium effect (η2 = .13) on postprandial blood glucose at 36-weeks gestation with the F2F group having lower values than controls. Although not significant, the F2F group started insulin later (33 weeks gestation) than the Home (27 weeks) and Control (31 weeks) groups. CONCLUSION: A theoretically-based, F2F exercise intervention has multiple health benefits and may be the necessary approach for promoting exercise motivation and behavior among GDM women.
Authors: Richard R Rubin; Wilfred Y Fujimoto; David G Marrero; Tina Brenneman; Jeanne B Charleston; Sharon L Edelstein; Edwin B Fisher; Ruth Jordan; William C Knowler; Lynne C Lichterman; Melvin Prince; Patricia M Rowe Journal: Control Clin Trials Date: 2002-04
Authors: Michelle F Mottola; Isabelle Giroux; Robert Gratton; Jo-Anne Hammond; Anthony Hanley; Stewart Harris; Ruth McManus; Margie H Davenport; Maggie M Sopper Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: S N Seneviratne; Y Jiang; Jgb Derraik; Lme McCowan; G K Parry; J B Biggs; S Craigie; S Gusso; G Peres; R O Rodrigues; A Ekeroma; W S Cutfield; P L Hofman Journal: BJOG Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: Danielle Symons Downs; Jennifer S Savage; Daniel E Rivera; Joshua M Smyth; Barbara J Rolls; Emily E Hohman; Katherine M McNitt; Allen R Kunselman; Christy Stetter; Abigail M Pauley; Krista S Leonard; Penghong Guo Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2018-06-08
Authors: Asher Y Rosinger; Hilary J Bethancourt; Abigail M Pauley; Celine Latona; Jason John; Alysha Kelyman; Krista S Leonard; Emily E Hohman; Katherine McNitt; Alison D Gernand; Danielle Symons Downs; Jennifer S Savage Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2021-07-03 Impact factor: 5.614
Authors: Abigail M Pauley; Emily Hohman; Jennifer S Savage; Daniel E Rivera; Penghong Guo; Krista S Leonard; Danielle Symons Downs Journal: J Obes Date: 2018-10-01