| Literature DB >> 32429069 |
Hannah Holmes1, Cristina Palacios2, YanYan Wu3, Jinan Banna1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this trial was to investigate the effect of educational short message service (SMS), or text messages, on excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) in a low-income, predominantly overweight/obese population.Entities:
Keywords: nutrition intervention; pregnancy; technology; telehealth; text message
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32429069 PMCID: PMC7285124 DOI: 10.3390/nu12051428
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Theory of change diagram for using short message service (SMS) in prevention of excessive gestational weight gain (GWG).
Institute of Medicine guidelines for gestational weight gain for singleton pregnancies [17].
| Normal BMI (18.5–24.9 kg/m2) | Overweight BMI (25.0–29.9 kg/m2) | Obese BMI (Greater Than 30.0 kg/m2) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suggested range (kg) | 11.5–16.0 | 7.0–11.5 | 5.0–9.0 |
| Excessive (kg) | >16.0 | >11.5 | >9.0 |
Baseline characteristics of the sample.
| Control ( | Intervention ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | Mean ( | SD (%) | Mean ( | SD (%) | |
| Age | 27.2 | 5.51 | 26.9 | 5.40 | 0.748 |
| Number of children | 1.27 | 1.47 | 1.50 | 1.33 | 0.453 |
| Pre-pregnancy weight (kg) | 76.2 | 15.9 | 80.6 | 17.7 | 0.238 |
| Pre-pregnancy BMI | 29.8 | 5.42 | 30.4 | 6.04 | 0.618 |
| Race/Ethnicity 1 | |||||
| Asian | 11 | 26.8 | 7 | 16.7 | 1.00 |
| American Indian | 4 | 9.76 | 3 | 7.14 | 0.392 |
| Black | 6 | 14.6 | 8 | 19.1 | 0.808 |
| Hispanic | 8 | 20.0 | 17 | 40.5 | 0.076 |
| Native Hawaiian | 11 | 26.8 | 11 | 26.2 | 1.00 |
| Pacific Islander | 9 | 22.0 | 10 | 23.8 | 1.00 |
| White | 19 | 46.3 | 19 | 45.2 | 1.00 |
| Education | |||||
| Less than college | 17 | 41.5 | 19 | 45.2 | 0.121 |
| Some college | 17 | 41.5 | 19 | 45.2 | |
| College or higher | 7 | 17.1 | 4 | 9.52 | |
1 Of the 83 participants at baseline, 45 (54.2%) self-identified multiple races/ethnicities.
Participants exceeding or not exceeding Institute of Medicine (IOM) GWG guidelines by treatment group and BMI category (n = 72).
| Participants Exceeding Guidelines | Participants Not Exceeding Guidelines | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Intervention | 23 (60.5%) | 15 (39.5%) | 0.509 |
| Control | 17 (50.0%) | 17 (50.0%) | ||
| BMI | Normal | 7 (77.8%) | 2 (22.2%) | 0.357 |
| Overweight | 14 (51.8%) | 13 (48.2%) |
Association of GWG with age, weight before pregnancy, height, and number of children.
| Beta (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 32.5 (18.6, 46.5) | <0.0001 |
| Age 25–34 vs. age 18–24 | −1.31 (−7.16, 4.55) | 0.662 |
| Age 35+ vs. age 18–24 | 11.5 (1.7, 21.2) | 0.021 |
| Age 35+ vs. age 25–34 | 12.8 (3.9, 21.6) | 0.005 |
| Weight before pregnancy | −0.20 (−0.37, −0.04) | 0.016 |
| Height | 0.71 (−0.22, 1.65) | 0.136 |
| 1–2 children vs. none | −0.31 (−6.64, 6.02) | 0.924 |
| 3–5 children vs. none | −7.02 (−15.03, 0.98) | 0.086 |
| 3–5 children vs. 1–2 children | −6.6 (−13.5, 0.05) | 0.051 |