Dataset Information

Association of Gestational Weight Gain With Maternal and Infant Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain are increasing globally. In 2009, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) provided specific recommendations regarding the ideal gestational weight gain. However, the association between gestational weight gain consistent with theIOM guidelines and pregnancy outcomes is unclear.

Objective

To perform a systematic review, meta-analysis, and metaregression to evaluate associations between gestational weight gain above or below the IOM guidelines (gain of 12.5-18 kg for underweight women [BMI <18.5]; 11.5-16 kg for normal-weight women [BMI 18.5-24.9]; 7-11 kg for overweight women [BMI 25-29.9]; and 5-9 kg for obese women [BMI ≥30]) and maternal and infant outcomes.

Data sources and study selection

Search of EMBASE, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, MEDLINE, and MEDLINE In-Process between January 1, 1999, and February 7, 2017, for observational studies stratified by prepregnancy BMI category and total gestational weight gain.

Data extraction and synthesis

Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Odds ratios (ORs) and absolute risk differences (ARDs) per live birth were calculated using a random-effects model based on a subset of studies with available data.

Main outcomes and measures

Primary outcomes were small for gestational age (SGA), preterm birth, and large for gestational age (LGA). Secondary outcomes were macrosomia, cesarean delivery, and gestational diabetes mellitus.

Results

Of 5354 identified studies, 23 (n = 1 309 136 women) met inclusion criteria. Gestational weight gain was below or above guidelines in 23% and 47% of pregnancies, respectively. Gestational weight gain below the recommendations was associated with higher risk of SGA (OR, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.44-1.64]; ARD, 5% [95% CI, 4%-6%]) and preterm birth (OR, 1.70 [1.32-2.20]; ARD, 5% [3%-8%]) and lower risk of LGA (OR, 0.59 [0.55-0.64]; ARD, -2% [-10% to -6%]) and macrosomia (OR, 0.60 [0.52-0.68]; ARD, -2% [-3% to -1%]); cesarean delivery showed no significant difference (OR, 0.98 [0.96-1.02]; ARD, 0% [-2% to 1%]). Gestational weight gain above the recommendations was associated with lower risk of SGA (OR, 0.66 [0.63-0.69]; ARD, -3%; [-4% to -2%]) and preterm birth (OR, 0.77 [0.69-0.86]; ARD, -2% [-2% to -1%]) and higher risk of LGA (OR, 1.85 [1.76-1.95]; ARD, 4% [2%-5%]), macrosomia (OR, 1.95 [1.79-2.11]; ARD, 6% [4%-9%]), and cesarean delivery (OR, 1.30 [1.25-1.35]; ARD, 4% [3%-6%]). Gestational diabetes mellitus could not be evaluated because of the nature of available data.

Conclusions and relevance

In this systematic review and meta-analysis of more than 1 million pregnant women, 47% had gestational weight gain greater than IOM recommendations and 23% had gestational weight gain less than IOM recommendations. Gestational weight gain greater than or less than guideline recommendations, compared with weight gain within recommended levels, was associated with higher risk of adverse maternal and infant outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Goldstein RF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5815056 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceBoth low and high gestational weight gain have been associated with adverse maternal and infant outcomes, but optimal gestational weight gain remains uncertain and not well defined for all prepregnancy weight ranges.ObjectivesTo examine the association of ranges of gestational weight gain with risk of adverse maternal and infant outcomes and estimate optimal gestational weight gain ranges across prepregnancy body mass index categories.Design, setting, and participantsIndividual participant-level meta-analysis using data from 196 670 participants within 25 cohort studies from Europe and North America (main study sample). Optimal gestational weight gain ranges were estimated for each prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) category by selecting the range of gestational weight gain that was associated with lower risk for any adverse outcome. Individual participant-level data from 3505 participants within 4 separate hospital-based cohorts were used as a validation sample. Data were collected between 1989 and 2015. The final date of follow-up was December 2015.ExposuresGestational weight gain.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome termed any adverse outcome was defined as the presence of 1 or more of the following outcomes: preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, gestational diabetes, cesarean delivery, preterm birth, and small or large size for gestational age at birth.ResultsOf the 196 670 women (median age, 30.0 years [quartile 1 and 3, 27.0 and 33.0 years] and 40 937 were white) included in the main sample, 7809 (4.0%) were categorized at baseline as underweight (BMI <18.5); 133 788 (68.0%), normal weight (BMI, 18.5-24.9); 38 828 (19.7%), overweight (BMI, 25.0-29.9); 11 992 (6.1%), obesity grade 1 (BMI, 30.0-34.9); 3284 (1.7%), obesity grade 2 (BMI, 35.0-39.9); and 969 (0.5%), obesity grade 3 (BMI, ≥40.0). Overall, any adverse outcome occurred in 37.2% (n = 73 161) of women, ranging from 34.7% (2706 of 7809) among women categorized as underweight to 61.1% (592 of 969) among women categorized as obesity grade 3. Optimal gestational weight gain ranges were 14.0 kg to less than 16.0 kg for women categorized as underweight; 10.0 kg to less than 18.0 kg for normal weight; 2.0 kg to less than 16.0 kg for overweight; 2.0 kg to less than 6.0 kg for obesity grade 1; weight loss or gain of 0 kg to less than 4.0 kg for obesity grade 2; and weight gain of 0 kg to less than 6.0 kg for obesity grade 3. These gestational weight gain ranges were associated with low to moderate discrimination between those with and those without adverse outcomes (range for area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.55-0.76). Results for discriminative performance in the validation sample were similar to the corresponding results in the main study sample (range for area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.51-0.79).Conclusions and relevanceIn this meta-analysis of pooled individual participant data from 25 cohort studies, the risk for adverse maternal and infant outcomes varied by gestational weight gain and across the range of prepregnancy weights. The estimates of optimal gestational weight gain may inform prenatal counseling; however, the optimal gestational weight gain ranges had limited predictive value for the outcomes assessed.

Project description:BackgroundThe association between Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines and pregnancy outcomes across ethnicities is uncertain. We evaluated the associations of gestational weight gain (GWG) outside 2009 IOM guidelines, with maternal and infant outcomes across the USA, western Europe and east Asia, with subgroup analyses in Asia. The aim was to explore ethnic differences in maternal prepregnancy body mass index (BMI), GWG and health outcomes across these regions.MethodsSystematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of observational studies were used for the study. MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, Embase and all Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) Reviews were searched from 1999 to 2017. Studies were stratified by prepregnancy BMI category and total pregnancy GWG. Odds ratio (ORs) 95% confidence intervals (CI) applied recommended GWG within each BMI category as the reference. Primary outcomes were small for gestational age (SGA), preterm birth and large for gestational age (LGA). Secondary outcomes were macrosomia, caesarean section and gestational diabetes.ResultsOverall, 5874 studies were identified and 23 were included (n = 1,309,136). Prepregnancy overweight/obesity in the USA, Europe and Asia was measured at 42%, 30% and 10% respectively, with underweight 5%, 3% and 17%. GWG below guidelines in the USA, Europe and Asia was 21%, 18% and 31%, and above was 51%, 51% and 37% respectively. Applying regional BMI categories in Asia showed GWG above guidelines (51%) was similar to that in the USA and Europe. GWG below guidelines was associated with a higher risk of SGA (USA/Europe [OR 1.51; CI 1.39, 1.63]; Asia [1.63; 1.45, 1.82]) and preterm birth (USA/Europe [1.35; 1.17, 1.56]; Asia [1.06; 0.78, 1.44]) than GWG within guidelines. GWG above guidelines was associated with a higher risk of LGA (USA/Europe [1.93; 1.81, 2.06]; Asia [1.68; 1.51 , 1.87]), macrosomia (USA/Europe [1.87; 1.70, 2.06]; Asia [2.18; 1.91, 2.49]) and caesarean (USA/Europe [1.26; 1.21, 1.33]; Asia [1.37; 1.30, 1.45]). Risks remained elevated when regional BMI categories were applied for GWG recommendations. More women in Asia were categorised as having GWG below guidelines using World Health Organization (WHO) (60%) compared to regional BMI categories (16%), yet WHO BMI was not accompanied by increased risks of adverse outcomes.ConclusionsWomen in the USA and western Europe have higher prepregnancy BMI and higher rates of GWG above guidelines than women in east Asia. However, when using regional BMI categories in east Asia, rates of GWG above guidelines are similar across the three continents. GWG outside guidelines is associated with adverse outcomes across all regions. If regional BMI categories are used in east Asia, IOM guidelines are applicable in the USA, western Europe and east Asia.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the association between gestational weight gain and maternal and neonatal outcomes in a large, geographically diverse cohort. METHODS:Trained chart abstractors at 25 hospitals obtained maternal and neonatal data for all deliveries on randomly selected days over 3 years (2008-2011). Gestational weight gain was derived using weight at delivery minus prepregnancy or first-trimester weight and categorized as below, within, or above the Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines in this retrospective cohort study. Maternal (primary or repeat cesarean delivery, third- or fourth-degree lacerations, severe postpartum hemorrhage, hypertensive disease of pregnancy) and neonatal (preterm birth, shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, hypoglycemia) outcomes were compared among women in the gestational weight gain categories in unadjusted and adjusted analyses with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI reported. Covariates included age, race-ethnicity, tobacco use, insurance type, parity, prior cesarean delivery, pregestational diabetes, hypertension, and hospital type. RESULTS:Of the 29,861 women included, 51% and 21% had gestational weight gain above and below the guidelines, respectively. There was an association between gestational weight gain above the IOM guidelines and cesarean delivery in both nulliparous women (adjusted OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.31-1.59) and multiparous women (adjusted OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.13-1.41) and hypertensive diseases of pregnancy in nulliparous and multiparous women combined (adjusted OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.66-2.04). For the neonatal outcomes, gestational weight gain above the IOM guidelines was associated with shoulder dystocia (adjusted OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.41-2.14), macrosomia (adjusted OR 2.66, 95% CI 2.03-3.48), and neonatal hypoglycemia (adjusted OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.16-2.22). Gestational weight gain below the guidelines was associated with spontaneous (adjusted OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.31-1.73) and indicated (adjusted OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.12-1.60) preterm birth. CONCLUSION:In a large, diverse cohort with prospectively collected data, gestational weight gain below or above guidelines is associated with a variety of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of excessive gestational weight gain (EGWG) during pregnancy is increasing, and it is extremely harmful to pregnant women and newborns. Previous studies have suggested that EGWG is associated with various factors. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify, quantify and analyze determinants of EGWG and evaluate the effect of these determinants on EGWG.MethodsWe searched for articles, from January 2009 to November 2020, related to the determinants of EGWG during pregnancy using four Chinese and four English databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement was utilized to guide the systematic review and meta-analysis process.ResultsSeventy studies, which identified EGWG factors in pregnant women (58 factors, 3 themes: individual [7 aspects, 37 factors]; family [4 aspects, 8 factors]; and social [4 aspects, 13 factors]), were included and analyzed in the systematic review. A meta-analysis was conducted for 13 factors (including 10 individual factors, 2 family factors, and 1 social factor) and revealed that pre-pregnancy overweight (including obesity), younger age (≤ 30 years old), unemployed, primiparity, smoking, and being unmarried (including divorced) were risk factors for EGWG, while prepregnancy underweight and inadequate antenatal care were protective factors for EGWG. There was no significant correlation between EGWG and education level, alcohol consumption, planning pregnancy, food security, and whether access to nutrition guidance during pregnancy.ConclusionsEGWG was prevalent in pregnant women, and its prevalence seemed to be high and similar in many countries. Based on observational studies with medium-level and high-level evidence, some individual, family, and social factors were found to be associated with EGWG using qualitative and quantitative methods. In the future, exposure of pregnant women to risk factors for EGWG should be avoided, and interventions should be developed around the identified factors.

Project description:ImportanceExcessive gestational weight gain (GWG) is common and associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Antenatal lifestyle interventions limit GWG; yet benefits of different intervention types and specific maternal and neonatal outcomes are unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of different types of diet and physical activity-based antenatal lifestyle interventions with GWG and maternal and neonatal outcomes.Data sourcesA 2-stage systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Health Technology Assessment Database was conducted from February 1, 2017, to May 31, 2020. Search results from the present study were integrated with those from a previous systematic review from 1990 to February 2017.Study selectionRandomized trials reporting GWG and maternal and neonatal outcomes.Data extraction and synthesisData were extracted for random-effects meta-analyses to calculate the summary effect estimates and 95% CIs.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes were clinically prioritized, with mean GWG as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, cesarean section, preterm delivery, large or small for gestational age neonates, neonatal intensive care unit admission, or fetal death.ResultsA total of 117 randomized clinical trials of antenatal lifestyle interventions (involving 34 546 women) were included. Overall lifestyle intervention was associated with reduced GWG (-1.15 kg; 95% CI, -1.40 to -0.91), risk of gestational diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.89), and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.94) vs routine care. Compared with routine care, diet was associated with less GWG (-2.63 kg; 95% CI, -3.87 to -1.40) than physical activity (-1.04 kg; 95% CI, -1.33 to -0.74) or mixed interventions (eg, unstructured lifestyle support, written information with weight monitoring, or behavioral support alone) (-0.74 kg; 95% CI, -1.06 to -0.43). Diet was associated with reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.45-0.82), preterm delivery (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.84), large for gestational age neonate (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.08-0.47), neonatal intensive care admission (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.95), and total adverse maternal (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.92) and neonatal outcomes (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.72). Physical activity was associated with reduced GWG and reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.75), hypertensive disorders (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.90), cesarean section (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95), and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.71-0.86). Diet with physical activity was associated with reduced GWG (-1.35 kg; 95% CI, -1.95 to -0.75) and reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.96) and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95). Mixed interventions were associated with reduced GWG only.Conclusions and relevanceThis systematic review and meta-analysis found level 1 evidence that antenatal structured diet and physical activity-based lifestyle interventions were associated with reduced GWG and lower risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. The findings support the implementation of such interventions in routine antenatal care and policy around the world.

Project description:IntroductionAn increased metabolic demand during pregnancy is fulfilled by gaining sufficient gestational weight. Women who gain inadequate-weight are at a high-risk of premature birth or having a baby with low-birth weight. However, women who gain excessive-weight are at a high-risk of having a baby with macrosomia. The aim of this review was to determine the distribution of gestational weight gain and its association with birth-outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa.MethodsFor this systematic review and meta-analysis, we performed a literature search using PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases. We searched grey-literature from Google and Google Scholar, and region-specific journals from the African Journals Online (AJOL) database. We critically appraised the included studies using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Two independent reviewers evaluated the quality of the studies and extracted the data. We calculated pooled relative-risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsOf 1450 retrieved studies, 26 met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen studies classified gestational weight gain according to the United States Institute of Medicine recommendations. The percentage adequate amount of gestational weight ranged from 3% to 62%. The percentage of inadequate weight was >50% among nine studies. Among underweight women, the percentage of women who gained inadequate gestational weight ranged from 67% to 98%. Only two studies were included in the meta-analyses to evaluate the association of gestational weight gain with pre-eclampsia and macrosomia. No difference was observed among women who gained inadequate and adequate gestational weight regarding experiencing pre-eclampsia (RR, 0.71; 95% CI: 0.22, 2.28, P = 0.57). Excessive gestational weight gain was not significantly associated with macrosomia compared to adequate weight gain (RR, 0.68; 95% CI: 0.38, 1.22, P = 0.20).ConclusionA substantial proportion of sub-Saharan African women gain inadequate gestational weight particularly high among underweight women. Future interventions would need to design effective pre-pregnancy weight management strategies.