Dataset Information

Gestational weight gain and group prenatal care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Group visits for chronic medical conditions in non-pregnant populations have demonstrated successful outcomes including greater weight loss compared to individual visits for weight management. It is plausible that group prenatal care can similarly assist women in meeting gestational weight gain goals. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of group vs. traditional prenatal care on gestational weight gain.

Methods

A keyword search of Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, clinicaltrials.gov, and Google Scholar was performed up to April 2017. Studies were included if they compared gestational weight gain in a group prenatal care setting to traditional prenatal care in either randomized controlled trials, cohort, or case-control studies. The primary and secondary outcomes were excessive and adequate gestational weight gain according to the Institute of Medicine guidelines. Heterogeneity was assessed with the Q test and I² statistic. Pooled relative risks (RRs) and confidence intervals (CI) were reported with random-effects models from the randomized controlled trials (RCT) and cohort studies.

Results

One RCT, one secondary analysis of an RCT, one study with "random assignment", and twelve cohort studies met the inclusion criteria for a total of 13,779 subjects. Thirteen studies used the CenteringPregnancy model, defined by 10 sessions that emphasize goal setting and self-monitoring. Studies targeted specific populations such as adolescents, African-Americans, Hispanics, active-duty military or their spouses, and women with obesity or gestational diabetes. There were no significant differences in excessive [7 studies: pooled rates 47% (1806/3582) vs. 43% (3839/8521), RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97-1.23] or adequate gestational weight gain [6 studies: pooled rates 31% (798/2875) vs. 30% (1410/5187), RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.08] in group and traditional prenatal care among the nine studies that reported categorical gestational weight gain outcomes in the meta-analysis.

Conclusions

Group prenatal care was not associated with excessive or adequate gestational weight gain in the meta-analysis. Since outcomes were overall inconsistent, we propose that prenatal care models (e.g., group vs. traditional) should be evaluated in a more rigorous fashion with respect to gestational weight gain.

SUBMITTER: Kominiarek MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6327616 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gestational weight gain and group prenatal care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kominiarek Michelle A MA Lewkowitz Adam K AK Carter Ebony E Fowler Susan A SA Simon Melissa M

BMC pregnancy and childbirth 20190109 1

<h4>Background</h4>Group visits for chronic medical conditions in non-pregnant populations have demonstrated successful outcomes including greater weight loss compared to individual visits for weight management. It is plausible that group prenatal care can similarly assist women in meeting gestational weight gain goals. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of group vs. traditional prenatal care on gestational weight gain.<h4>Methods</h4>A keyword search of Medline, Embase, Scopus ...[more]

PMID: 30626345

Similar Datasets

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:BackgroundGestational weight gain has been associated with some adverse perinatal outcomes, but few studies have examined the association between gestational weight gain and offspring's cognition and their conclusions are inconsistent. Our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence regarding the association between gestational weight gain and offspring's cognitive skills.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO number, CRD42017073266), we systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for studies examining association between gestational weight gain and offspring's cognitive skills, without restriction in study design or language. Two reviewers extracted in an independent way the data. The Quality of Reporting of Observational Longitudinal Research scale was used to assess the quality of included studies. Effect size (ES) for adjusted models and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated for (i) intelligence quotient, (ii) language related skills and (iii) mathematic related skills comparing offspring's cognitive skills when gestational weight gain was within recommendations (as reference) with those from mothers whose gestational weight gain was above or below the recommendations.ResultsThirteen studies were included. There was a positive trend that associated gestational weight gain above recommendations with better offspring's intelligence quotient, although not statistically significant (ES 0.02, 95% CI -0.00, 0.05; I2 = 0.00%).ConclusionsThere is a not significant positive association between gestational weight gain above recommendations and intelligence quotient and some studies reported associations between gestational weight gain and offspring's cognitive skills. Our analyses confirm a wide variability in the results of studies published so far and highlights the need for conducting studies including specific samples of pregnant women by pre-pregnancy body mass index and trimester of pregnancy.

Project description:ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the relationship between gestational weight gain and the risk of small for gestational age in obese pregnant women.MethodsStudies were identified by searching the Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed databases up to June 30th, 2022. The meta-analysis was carried out to determine the risk of small for gestational age with gestational weight gain (GWG) below the 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines compared with within the guidelines in obese women. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality. The chi-squared test, Q test, and I2 test were used to evaluate statistical heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were conducted, and publication bias was assessed by funnel plots and Egger's test. Sensitivity analyses were performed for three groups of obese people (I: BMI 30-34.9 kg/m2, II: BMI 35-39.9 kg/m2, and III: BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) to examine the association of obesity and SGA.ResultsA total of 788 references were screened, and 29 studies (n = 1242420 obese women) were included in the systematic review. Obese women who gained weight below the IOM guideline had a higher risk of SGA than those who gained weight within the guideline (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.16-1.38, Z = 5.36). Both weight loss (<0 kg) and inadequate weight (0-4.9 kg) during pregnancy in obese women are associated with an increased risk of SGA (OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.37-1.64, Z = 8.82) (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.14-1.23, Z = 8.06). The same conclusions were also confirmed for the three obesity classes (I: OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.29-1.47; II: OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.30-1.49; and III: OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.16-1.37). Subgroup analysis by country showed that GWG below guidelines in obese women of the USA and Europe was associated with risk for SGA (USA (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.15-1.46), Europe (OR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.11-1.40)) and not in Asia (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 0.91-1.50).ConclusionOur findings indicated that obese pregnant women who had weight loss or inadequate weight (0-4.9 kg) according to the IOM guideline had increased risks for SGA. Moreover, we also evaluated that gestational weight loss (<0 kg) in these pregnancies was associated with an increased risk for SGA compared with inadequate weight (0-4.9 kg) in these pregnancies. Therefore, the clinical focus should assist obese women to achieve GWG within the IOM guidelines to decrease the risk for SGA.

Project description:ImportanceBody 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.ObjectiveTo 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 selectionSearch 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 synthesisData 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 measuresPrimary 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.ResultsOf 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 relevanceIn 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.

Project description:BackgroundExcessive weight gain during pregnancy results in maternal and fetal complications and could further impact offspring. The evidence regarding the association between regular weighing during the antenatal period and excessive weight gain is limited.MethodsWe will systematically review individual and cluster randomized controlled trials that evaluated regular weighing as an intervention compared to weighing only at the first booking of the antenatal visit. Trials that assessed the effectiveness of exercise, diet, or other behavioral interventions will be excluded. Pregnant women with a singleton pregnancy and no preexisting health complications are eligible for the review. The primary outcome will be the proportion of women at term who exceed the upper limit of the target range of weight as defined by the guidelines or recommendations for the population. We will search MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase (via EMBASE.com ), Scopus, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL via EBSCO), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the trial protocol registers, ClinicalTrials.gov , and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal. Full-text articles, unpublished studies, and ongoing trials reported in any language will be included. Two review authors will independently examine and screen for eligible studies and extract data for synthesis.DiscussionWe will discuss the effectiveness of regular weighing as a single intervention on reducing the proportion of women who have excessive gestational weight gain. This study will provide key information for countries to develop guidelines on antenatal care and strategies to tackle excessive gestational weight gain. We will create a "Summary of findings" table (Summary of findings table 1) according to the methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020212581.

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.

Project description:BackgroundPhthalates are endocrine disrupting chemicals that may influence weight status; however, few studies have considered weight gain during pregnancy and subsequent long-term weight changes in women.ObjectiveTo determine associations of prenatal phthalate exposure with maternal weight during pregnancy and through up to seven years post-delivery.MethodsWe analyzed 15 urinary phthalate biomarker concentrations during the 2nd and 3rd trimesters among 874 pregnant women enrolled in the Programming Research in Obesity, Growth Environment and Social Stress Study in Mexico City. We examined three time-specific maternal weight outcomes: gestational weight gain (between 2nd and 3rd trimesters), short-term weight (between 3rd trimester and 12 months post-delivery), and long-term weight (between 18 months and 6-7 years post-delivery). We used Bayesian Kernel Machine Regression (BKMR) to estimate associations for the total phthalate mixture, as well as multivariable linear mixed models for individual phthalate biomarkers.ResultsAs a mixture, 2nd trimester urinary phthalate biomarker concentrations were associated with somewhat lower gestational weight gain between the 2nd and 3rd trimesters (interquartile range, IQR, difference: -0.07 standard deviations, SD; 95% credible interval, CrI: -0.20, 0.06); multivariable regression and BKMR models indicated that this inverse association was primarily driven by mono-2-ethyl-5-carboxypentyl terephthalate (MECPTP). Prenatal (2nd and 3rd trimesters) urinary phthalate mixture concentrations were positively associated with maternal weight change through 12 months postpartum (IQR difference: 0.11 SD; 95% CrI: 0.00, 0.23); these associations persisted from 18 months to 6-7 years follow-up (IQR difference: 0.07 SD; 95% CrI: 0.04, 0.10). Postpartum weight changes were associated with mono-3-carboxypropyl phthalate (MCPP) and MECPTP.ConclusionsPrenatal phthalate exposure was inversely associated with gestational weight gain and positively associated with long-term changes in maternal weight. Further investigation is required to understand how phthalates may influence body composition and whether they contribute to the development of obesity and other cardiometabolic diseases in women.

Dataset Information

Gestational weight gain and group prenatal care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Gestational weight gain and group prenatal care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets