Tracey Ledoux1, Sajeevika Saumali Daundasekara2, Anitra Beasley3, Jessica Robinson2, McClain Sampson4. 1. Department of Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, TX, 77204, USA. taledoux@uh.edu. 2. Department of Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, TX, 77204, USA. 3. Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children's Pavilion for Women, 6651 Main Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. 4. Graduate College of Social Work, University of Houston, Houston, TX, 77204, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine if pre-conception intuitive eating, an adaptive eating behavior, was related to gestational weight gain (GWG) and the likelihood of exceeding GWG recommendations. METHODS: This prospective survey study took place in an outpatient obstetric clinic. Participants completed the pre-conception Intuitive Eating Scale for Pregnancy during a prenatal check-up appointment and total GWG was collected from the medical record. The pre-conception Intuitive Eating Scale for Pregnancy assesses unconditional permission to eat, eating for physical rather than emotional reasons, and reliance on hunger and satiety to inform what, when, and how much to eat. Hierarchical linear multiple regression and logistic multiple regression analyses determined associations between pre-conception intuitive eating and GWG on the total sample and stratified by weight status (normal/underweight, overweight, and obese). RESULTS: The majority of the sample (n = 253) was white, married, employed, had annual household income > $50,000, and had a college degree. No aspects of pre-conception intuitive eating predicted the likelihood of excess GWG. However, in the total sample, unconditional permission to eat (subscale) was inversely related to total GWG (B = -0.16, p < 0.05). Among women with obesity (n = 36), eating for physical rather than emotional reasons (subscale) was inversely related to total GWG (B = -0.47, p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: Some aspects of intuitive eating during the pre-conception period were related to total GWG, particularly for women with obesity. However, intuitive eating scores did not increase or decrease the likelihood of excess GWG. More research is needed to understand the mechanisms for this association before clinical recommendations can be made. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III (Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case-control analytic studies).
PURPOSE: To determine if pre-conception intuitive eating, an adaptive eating behavior, was related to gestational weight gain (GWG) and the likelihood of exceeding GWG recommendations. METHODS: This prospective survey study took place in an outpatient obstetric clinic. Participants completed the pre-conception Intuitive Eating Scale for Pregnancy during a prenatal check-up appointment and total GWG was collected from the medical record. The pre-conception Intuitive Eating Scale for Pregnancy assesses unconditional permission to eat, eating for physical rather than emotional reasons, and reliance on hunger and satiety to inform what, when, and how much to eat. Hierarchical linear multiple regression and logistic multiple regression analyses determined associations between pre-conception intuitive eating and GWG on the total sample and stratified by weight status (normal/underweight, overweight, and obese). RESULTS: The majority of the sample (n = 253) was white, married, employed, had annual household income > $50,000, and had a college degree. No aspects of pre-conception intuitive eating predicted the likelihood of excess GWG. However, in the total sample, unconditional permission to eat (subscale) was inversely related to total GWG (B = -0.16, p < 0.05). Among women with obesity (n = 36), eating for physical rather than emotional reasons (subscale) was inversely related to total GWG (B = -0.47, p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: Some aspects of intuitive eating during the pre-conception period were related to total GWG, particularly for women with obesity. However, intuitive eating scores did not increase or decrease the likelihood of excess GWG. More research is needed to understand the mechanisms for this association before clinical recommendations can be made. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III (Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case-control analytic studies).
Authors: Michael D Jensen; Donna H Ryan; Caroline M Apovian; Jamy D Ard; Anthony G Comuzzie; Karen A Donato; Frank B Hu; Van S Hubbard; John M Jakicic; Robert F Kushner; Catherine M Loria; Barbara E Millen; Cathy A Nonas; F Xavier Pi-Sunyer; June Stevens; Victor J Stevens; Thomas A Wadden; Bruce M Wolfe; Susan Z Yanovski Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Inmaculada Bautista-Castaño; Patricia Henriquez-Sanchez; Nestor Alemán-Perez; Jose J Garcia-Salvador; Alicia Gonzalez-Quesada; Jose A García-Hernández; Luis Serra-Majem Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-11-20 Impact factor: 3.240