Marina Vargas-Terrones1, Taniya S Nagpal2,3, Maria Perales4,5, Harry Prapavessis3, Michelle F Mottola2,6,7, Ruben Barakat1. 1. AFIPE Research Group, Faculty of Sciences for Physical Activity and Sport, INEF, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM), Madrid, Spain. 2. R. Samuel McLaughlin Foundation-Exercise and Pregnancy Laboratory, School of Kinesiology, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. 3. Exercise and Health Psychology Laboratory, School of Kinesiology, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. 4. Camilo José Cela University, Madrid, Spain. 5. Research Institute of Hospital 12 de Octubre (i+12), Madrid, Spain. 6. Department of Anatomy & Cell Biology, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. 7. Children's Health Research Institute, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous literature supports exercise as a preventative agent for prenatal depression; however, treatment effects for women at risk for prenatal depression remain unexplored. The purpose of the study was to examine whether exercise can lower depressive symptoms among women who began pregnancy at risk for depression using both a statistical significance and reliable and clinically significant change criteria. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of two randomized controlled trials that followed the same exercise protocol. Pregnant women were allocated to an exercise intervention group (IG) or control group (CG). All participants completed the Center for Epidemiological Depression (CES-D) scale at gestational week 9-16 and 36-38. Women with a baseline score ⩾16 were included. A clinically reliable cut-off was calculated as a 7-point change in scores from pre- to post-intervention. RESULTS:Thirty-six women in the IG and 25 women in the CG scored ⩾16 on the CES-D at baseline. At week 36-38 the IG had a statistically significant lower CES-D score (14.4 ± 8.6) than the CG (19.4 ± 11.1; p < 0.05). Twenty-two women in the IG (61%) had a clinically reliable decrease in their post-intervention score compared to eight women in the CG (32%; p < 0.05). Among the women who met the reliable change criteria, 18 (81%) in the IG and 7 (88%) in the CG had a score <16 post-intervention, with no difference between groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A structured exercise program might be a useful treatment option for women at risk for prenatal depression.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Previous literature supports exercise as a preventative agent for prenatal depression; however, treatment effects for women at risk for prenatal depression remain unexplored. The purpose of the study was to examine whether exercise can lower depressive symptoms among women who began pregnancy at risk for depression using both a statistical significance and reliable and clinically significant change criteria. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of two randomized controlled trials that followed the same exercise protocol. Pregnant women were allocated to an exercise intervention group (IG) or control group (CG). All participants completed the Center for Epidemiological Depression (CES-D) scale at gestational week 9-16 and 36-38. Women with a baseline score ⩾16 were included. A clinically reliable cut-off was calculated as a 7-point change in scores from pre- to post-intervention. RESULTS: Thirty-six women in the IG and 25 women in the CG scored ⩾16 on the CES-D at baseline. At week 36-38 the IG had a statistically significant lower CES-D score (14.4 ± 8.6) than the CG (19.4 ± 11.1; p < 0.05). Twenty-two women in the IG (61%) had a clinically reliable decrease in their post-intervention score compared to eight women in the CG (32%; p < 0.05). Among the women who met the reliable change criteria, 18 (81%) in the IG and 7 (88%) in the CG had a score <16 post-intervention, with no difference between groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A structured exercise program might be a useful treatment option for women at risk for prenatal depression.