|
RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING EXERCISE DURING PREGNANCY MADE
BY PRIVATE/SMALL GROUP PRACTICE OBSTETRICIANS IN THE USA
|
Department of Exercise Science and Athletic Training, Northern Arizona University,
USA
| Received |
|
12 June 2006 |
| Accepted |
|
27
July 2006 |
| Published |
|
01
September 2006 |
©
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2006) 5, 449 - 458
Search
Google Scholar for Citing Articles
| ABSTRACT |
| For pregnant women, exercise offers numerous benefits with little
risk. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)
endorses aerobic exercise for all pregnant women without medical or
obstetric complications. Nonetheless, only a small percentage of pregnant
women meet exercise guidelines. We investigated the extent to which
obstetricians (Obs) in private or small group practice in the USA
actively recommend exercise to their pregnant patients. Surveys were
sent to 300 Obs in 33 American cities, of which 83 were returned.
52% of respondents reported discussing exercise with 81-100% of their
patients. Using a 7- point Likert scale (1 = never, 7 = always), Obs
reported recommending aerobic exercise more often than resistance
exercise (5.6 ± 1.5 versus 3.8 ± 1.6, p < 0.001). Obs do not routinely
advise sedentary women to initiate exercise during pregnancy (mean
4.4 ± 1.8). Of the 67% of Obs who specify a target exercise duration,
95% recommend > 16 min, consistent with ACOG guidelines.
However, 62% of Obs reported that they regularly specify a maximum
heart rate, even though ACOG guidelines do not. Half of respondents
indicated that they advise a reduction in exercise load during the
third trimester, even for uncomplicated pregnancies. Respondents'
opinions were mixed regarding the extent to which exercise reduces
gestational diabetes or preeclampsia risk and they believe more research
on exercise during pregnancy is needed. Half of Obs do not routinely
discuss exercise. The majority is hesitant to advise sedentary gravidae
to start exercise and is conservative with respect to exercise intensity.
Action may be needed to convince more Obs to routinely recommend exercise
to all healthy patients.
KEY
WORDS: Physical activity, prenatal activity, pregnant women,
guidelines for exercise.
|
| INTRODUCTION |
|
Modern popular culture has embraced the concept of a "fit
pregnancy", as demonstrated by the plethora of publications
available on this topic. Scientific literature supports the contention
that regular exercise during pregnancy incurs little risk (Avery
et al., 1999;
Hall and Kaufmann, 1987;
Kardel and Kase, 1998;
Leiferman and Evenson, 2003;
Lokey et al., 1991;
Morris and Johnson, 2005)
and is beneficial, in terms of both mental (Da Costa et al., 2003;
Goodwin et al., 2000;
Marquez-Sterling et al., 2000;
Poudivigne and O'Connor, 2006)
and physical (Clapp, 2000;
Dempsey et al., 2005;
Pivarnik et al., 2006)
health. In accordance with research findings, current guidelines
published by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
(ACOG), as well as other national organizations such as the Society
of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC), endorse exercise
for pregnant women.
Specifically, the ACOG Committee Opinion on exercise during pregnancy
published in 2002
recommends that, barring medical or obstetric contraindications,
pregnant women engage in 30 or more minutes of moderate exercise
daily, or at least on "most" days of the week (ACOG, 2002).
This recommendation is essentially the same as that made for the
general population by the U. S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention and the American College of Sports Medicine (Pate et
al., 1995).
The 2003 joint statement of the SOGC and the Canadian Society for
Exercise Physiology (CSEP) regarding exercise during pregnancy went
beyond the ACOG statement in recommending resistance exercise as
well as aerobic exercise (Davies et al., 2003).
Although a priori evaluation is recommended for previously sedentary
women, this population is not excluded from the general exercise
recommendation by the ACOG or the SOGC/CSEP; indeed the latter groups'
statement provides a plan for inactive women to gradually increase
their activity level (Davies et al., 2003).
Despite the positive image and scholarly endorsement of exercise
during pregnancy, data from the 1994, 1996, 1998 and 2000 Behavior
Risk Factor Surveillance System indicate that pregnant women participate
in less leisure-time physical activity than do non-pregnant women
(Evenson et al., 2004;
Petersen et al., 2005).
In fact, one third (34.5%) of the pregnant women sampled in 2000
were completely sedentary (no leisure-time activity), and only 16%
undertook the ACOG recommended exercise volume (Evenson et al.,
2004).
Obstetricians are in a favorable position to encourage physical
activity (Krans et al., 2005), hence we sought to determine the extent to which obstetricians
in private or small group practice in the United States recommend
exercise to healthy patients, in accordance with current ACOG guidelines.
Due to the fact that the ACOG's position on exercise during pregnancy
was significantly more restrictive prior to 1994, it is possible
that some obstetricians adhere to now obsolete recommendations that
heart rate not exceed 140 bpm and the duration of "strenuous"
exercise be limited to 15 min. Therefore, we tested the possibility
that obstetricians who have been in practice for > 10 years are
more likely than those in practice < 10 years to suggest
a maximum heart rate and an exercise duration of < 15
min. We also asked obstetricians about the recommendations they
make regarding resistance exercise and modification of exercise
volume for the third trimester, as well as about their beliefs regarding
exercise and the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and
preeclampsia, and the extent to which more research on exercise
and pregnancy outcomes is needed.
|
| METHODS |
|
This study was approved by the Northern Arizona
University Institutional Review Board. An anonymous, 18 item survey
was mailed to 300 obstetricians located in 33 cities representing
17 randomly selected states (AZ, CA, CO, GA, IA, KS, ME, MN, MT,
NH, NM, OK, OR, SC, UT, WA, WY). The populations of the cities ranged
from 6,000 to 360,000. Obstetricians were identified via on-line
yellow pages and all listed obstetricians were included in the mailing
unless a complete address could not be obtained. The one exception
to this policy was the case of the largest listing, from which roughly
75% of the obstetricians were randomly selected for inclusion. Return
of the survey was construed as consent to participate in the study.
No incentives were offered for survey return.
The survey is available in the Appendix.
All 18 questions were close-ended and screened by an obstetrician
for face validity. Three items were self-descriptive multiple choice
(e.g., clinical title). Ten of the items asked participants for
a rating on a 7-point Likert scale with verbal anchors. The remaining
five items were multiple choice, designed to elicit a single response.
Survey responses were analyzed with SPSS-generated descriptive statistics,
t-tests and a correlation matrix. For both the t-tests and Pearson
correlation coefficients, significance was accepted at p < 0.05. Responses for 7-point Likert scale items
are reported as mean ± the standard deviation.
|
| RESULTS |
|
Of the 300 surveys mailed, 85 surveys were returned,
although two respondents stated that they no longer practiced obstetrics
and therefore declined to complete the survey. Twenty-two surveys
were returned undelivered, thus the response rate, considering only
those surveys that presumably reached the addressee, was 30%.
Subject characteristics
81 of 83 (98%) respondents identified themselves as holding the
title of MD, obstetrics and gynecology. Two respondents identified
themselves as holding the title MD, family medicine or other field.
For simplicity, the term "obstetricians" is used in this
paper to group all survey respondents. In terms of years of practice
in the field of obstetrics, 41% indicated 10 years, 31% indicated 11-20 years,
and 28% indicated > 20 years of experience. When asked to self-evaluate
their familiarity with the ACOG 2002 Committee Opinion on exercise
during pregnancy, the mean response was 5.2 ± 1.5, where 1 was equated
to "not familiar at all" and 7 was equated to "very
familiar". For this item, 24% of participants chose 7 ("very
familiar"), while only 13% rated their familiarity at less
than the mid-point (i.e., as a 1, 2, or 3).
Recommendations for exercise
When asked to estimate with what percent of pregnant patients they
specifically discuss exercise, half (52%) of respondents indicated
81-100%, while 18% estimated 61-80%, 16% estimated 41-60% and 14%
estimated 0-40%. Self-reported familiarity with the ACOG 2002 Committee
Opinion on exercise and pregnancy was positively correlated with
the percent of patients with whom exercise is discussed (r = 0.29,
p = 0.005). Three-quarters (75%) of respondents said that they initiate
the discussion about exercise, 18% reported that they discuss exercise
only when prompted by a client inquiry, and 7% indicated that their
staff handles discussions of exercise with pregnant patients.
The mean response regarding how often obstetricians recommend aerobic
exercise to patients in their first trimester was 5.6 ± 1.5, where
1 was equated to "never" and 7 to "always".
Nearly two thirds (63%) of respondents chose either a 6 or 7 (Table
1). A significantly lower (p < 0.001) mean response, 3.8
± 1.6, was obtained when the same question was asked about resistance
exercise (strength training) (Table
1). With respect to how often obstetricians advise sedentary
patients to begin a "moderate" exercise program during
the pregnancy, the mean response was 4.4 ± 1.8, or about mid-way
between "never" and "always". Only one third
(31%) of respondents answered this question with a 6 or 7 (Table
1). Frequency of recommending aerobic exercise was positively
correlated with recommending resistance exercise (r = 0.36, p =
0.001) and recommending exercise to previously sedentary patients
(r = 0.44, p < 0.001).
Recommendations for third trimester
Half (54%) of the participants reported that they recommend patients
who exercised throughout the first and second trimesters reduce
their aerobic exercise load (duration and/or intensity) during the
third trimester, even in the absence of obstetric complications.
Essentially the same percentage (49%) expressed the identical opinion
for resistance exercise. On the other hand, fewer than 10% of respondents
recommend that patients stop aerobic or resistance exercise in the
third trimester. Almost a quarter (23%) of the respondents said
they offer no specific recommendation regarding aerobic or resistance
exercise in the third trimester.
Intensity and duration of exercise
Participants were asked to estimate how often they advise patients
to keep their heart rate under a maximum level, such as 140 or 150
bpm. The mean response to this question was 5.3 ± 2.1 (Table
1), where 1 was equated to "never" and 7 was equated
to "always". A majority (62%) of participants selected
a 6 or 7 in response to this question (Table
1).
When asked what duration of aerobic exercise they suggest, 64% of
respondents chose > 16 min of continuous exercise. Only
3 participants, all of whom have been in practice for at least 16
years, reported that they recommend a target duration of <
15 min. A third (32%) of respondents said they offer no specific
recommendation regarding the duration of aerobic exercise.
Health benefits of exercise and research need
When asked to what extent regular aerobic exercise would reduce
the risk of GDM, respondents provided a mean rating of 4.7 ± 1.4,
where 1 was equated to "not at all" and 7 to "quite
a lot". Half (51%) of those polled selected a response above
the mid-point (Figure 1). When
asked the same question about exercise and the risk of preeclampsia,
the mean value was significantly lower ( 2.7 ± 1.6, p < 0.001).
Only 15% of the responses to this question were above the mid-point
(Figure 2). Nonetheless, responses
regarding GDM and preeclampsia were correlated; those who rated
the efficacy of exercise to reduce the risk of GDM higher also rated
the efficacy of exercise to reduce the risk of preeclampsia higher
(r = 0.50, p < 0.001). Ratings regarding exercise and GDM were
also positively correlated with recommending exercise to sedentary
individuals (r = 0.45, p < 0.001).
In general, obstetricians perceived a need for
more research on the effects of exercise during pregnancy on pregnancy
outcomes, as indicated by a mean response of 5.9 ± 1.2, and a modal
response of 7, equated to "much need".
Comparison by years in practice
We hypothesized that obstetricians who have been practicing for
< 10 years adhere more closely to ACOG 2002 guidelines
than those in practice longer. Contrary to expectation, we did not
find any significant differences between the two groups in frequency
of discussing or recommending exercise, or in their recommendations
about duration and intensity of exercise, including recommendations
for the third trimester. Where the two groups differed was in their
beliefs about the health benefits of exercise. Respondents with
< 10 years in obstetrics practice (n = 34) rated exercise
as significantly more effective in reducing the risk of GDM and
preeclampsia than did subjects with >10 years in obstetrics practice
(n = 49) (5.1 ± 1.0 versus 4.3 ± 1.6, p = 0.004 and 3.1 ± 1.7 versus
2.4 ± 1.5, p = 0.052, respectively) (Figures 1
and 2).
|
| DISCUSSION |
|
Despite the position of the ACOG that healthy
pregnant women carrying uncomplicated pregnancies should be encouraged
to engage in regular exercise, we found that only about half of
the obstetricians in our sample routinely discuss exercise with
their pregnant patients. This finding is consistent with a recent
study indicating that although 96% of pregnant women surveyed said
they had received advice on exercise during their pregnancies, the
primary sources of that advice were books, magazines, family, and
friends (Clarke and Gross, 2004).
An even lower rate of exercise discussion by obstetricians was reported
by Stafford and Blumenthal, 1998,
who found that obstetrician/gynecologists provided counseling on
exercise in only 13.8% of all adult patient visits, a frequency
similar to that of several other medical specialties. It is possible
that the lower frequency of exercise discussion found by Stafford
and Blumenthal, 1998
compared to that estimated by our survey participants is due to
increased frequency of exercise counseling by obstetricians over
the last 5-10 years, overestimation of the true frequency by our
survey respondents, or because obstetrician/gynecologists discuss
exercise less frequently with non-pregnant compared to pregnant
patients.
When obstetricians do discuss exercise with women in the first trimester
of pregnancy, they frequently recommend aerobic exercise. Resistance
exercise is recommended only by a minority of obstetricians (Table
1) who have apparently generalized their exercise endorsement
beyond the ACOG statement. As a group, the respondents appeared
hesitant to encourage sedentary women to initiate an exercise program
during pregnancy (Table 1).
Furthermore, contrary to our expectation, obstetricians in practice
for < 10 years were no more likely to recommend exercise
to an inactive woman than those in practice for >10 years. Our
findings contrast with a study of physicians in Michigan, of whom
87% believed that starting an exercise program is safe for pregnant
women without contraindications (Bauer et al., 2004).
The disparity between Bauer et al.'s (2004)
finding and the present results suggests that there may be a disconnect
between obstetricians' beliefs and their behaviors (i.e., actively
encouraging exercise). The reluctance of some obstetricians to advise
sedentary women to begin an exercise program is at odds with scientific
evidence supporting the safety and health benefits of initiating
exercise during pregnancy (Marquez-Sterling et al., 2000;
Lynch et al., 2003)
and represents a missed opportunity to promote a positive, potentially
long-term behavioral change (Artal and O'Toole, 2003;
Paisley et al., 2003).
Indeed, a study by Krans et al., 2005
found that the probability that a woman exercised during pregnancy
was increased if her obstetrician encouraged her to exercise. One
advantage of exercise promotion during obstetrical visits versus
other primary care settings is that pregnant women generally make
relatively frequent, repeated visits to their obstetrician, providing
the opportunity for reinforcement of the exercise endorsement, a
factor likely to improve compliance (Simons-Morton et al., 1998).
Nearly two thirds of obstetricians surveyed recommend a target duration
for aerobic exercise of 16-30 minutes, or more, which is compatible
with current ACOG guidelines. However, despite the fact that a heart
rate maximum was eliminated from the ACOG guidelines in 1994 (ACOG,
1994),
over 60% of respondents regularly advise pregnant patients to limit
exercise intensity to the level eliciting a heart rate of 140 or
150 bpm (Table 1). Similarly,
Bauer et al., 2004
found that 63% of physicians practicing in Michigan believe that
pregnant individuals should not exceed a heart rate of 140 bpm during
exercise and Krans et al., 2005
reported that the ACOG's more restrictive 1985 guidelines were invoked
in 69% of discussions on exercise between obstetricians and their
patients. Available studies do not support the necessity of a heart
rate limitation (Kardel and Kase, 1998;
Lokey et al., 1991;
Zeanah and Schlosser, 1993;
MacPhail et al., 2000),
rather, a target range for rating of perceived exertion (e.g., Borg
scale) has been proposed as an alternative means of selecting an
appropriate exercise intensity (Artal and O'Toole, 2003;
Stevenson, 1997).
When a pregnant woman chooses to be physically active during pregnancy,
about half of obstetricians surveyed recommend that she reduce her
exercise intensity and/or duration during the third trimester for
both aerobic and resistance exercise. In contrast, the ACOG statement
advises a second and third trimester reduction in exercise load
only for women at elevated risk of preterm labor or fetal growth
restriction (ACOG, 2002). A reduction in exercise load after mid-gestation
has been found to increase maternal weight gain, fetal growth, and
fetal fat mass (Clapp et al., 2002),
thus a seemingly conservative recommendation to reduce exercise
intensity and/or duration in the third trimester may have undesirable
effects.
The ACOG 2002 opinion identifies the prevention and mitigation of
GDM as potential benefits of regular exercise (ACOG, 2002). Nonetheless, opinions of the survey participants
were mixed regarding the extent to which regular aerobic exercise
can reduce the risk of GDM (Figure
1). Obstetricians in practice for < 10 years rated
exercise as more effective in reducing GDM risk than did those in
practice > 10 years (p = 0.004), suggesting that the latter group
are either less cognizant of current research or are more skeptical
of the findings. Those who rated the potential of exercise to reduce
GDM risk higher were also more likely to advise sedentary individuals
to start exercising (r = 0.45, p < 0.001), which may indicate
that obstetricians weigh potential benefits against perceived risk
when choosing whether or not to advise the initiation of exercise.
Presently, the evidence to support a link between physical activity
during pregnancy and the risk of preeclampsia, while promising,
is limited to four observational studies (Irwin et al., 1994;
Marcoux et al., 1989;
Saftlas et al., 2004;
Sorensen et al., 2003)
and one experimental trial with 16 subjects (Yeo et al., 2000).
Hence, it is not surprising that survey respondents were generally
skeptical on this point, although obstetricians in practice for
10 years were more optimistic than those in practice for > 10
years (p = 0.052; Figure 2).
Perceived potency of exercise to prevent GDM was positively correlated
with perceived capacity of exercise to prevent preeclampsia (r =
0.50, p < 0.001), despite the relative lack of data on the latter
complication, implying that some obstetricians view exercise as
more broadly beneficial than do others.
Limitations
We were interested in the independent views and behaviors of "typical"
practicing obstetricians rather than of those with highly specialized
practices or significant teaching and/or research responsibilities.
Consequently, we chose to survey obstetricians who were individually
listed in the yellow pages and working in small to moderately large
cities in the United States. This methodology likely biased our
sample toward obstetricians in private or small group practice rather
than those who work for large hospitals. Obstetricians working in
larger facilities may have more opportunity to exchange ideas with
other professionals and attend professional meetings, and thereby
may be more quickly apprised of ideological shifts. It is also possible
that systematic differences exist between obstetricians practicing
in cities with populations > 360,000 and those practicing in
cities in the size range we sampled (6,000 to 360,000), although
it is not clear a priori which group would adhere more closely to
ACOG guidelines
The response rate to this survey, 30%, is within the range reported
for mailed surveys of obstetrician-gynecologists. Two factors may
contribute to the response rate: First, no second requests or reminders
were mailed and second, the survey did not originate from a Department
of Obstetrics and Gynecology or the ACOG's own Department of Research,
and therefore some recipients may have perceived it as unofficial
or unimportant. On the assumption that physicians who view exercise
more positively would be more likely to respond to a survey related
to exercise, it is possible that the mean responses obtained overestimate
the true means with respect to frequency of discussing and recommending
exercise to pregnant patients. Thus, despite the potential limitations
of our sample, we believe our results point to a disparity between
ACOG guidelines on exercise during pregnancy and the actual practices
of obstetricians in private or small group practice in the United
States.
|
| CONCLUSIONS |
|
Active
promotion of exercise by obstetricians may help to raise rates of
physical activity among pregnant women (Krans et al., 2005; Simons-Morton et al., 1998). Our findings indicate that while some obstetricians
do follow current ACOG guidelines and routinely recommend aerobic
exercise to healthy, pregnant patients, a significant percentage
do not do so. In particular, many obstetricians seldom advise sedentary
women to initiate an exercise program during the pregnancy, despite
the low risk and high probability of health benefits, possibly including
a decreased risk of GDM (Dempsey et al., 2004) and preeclampsia (Marcoux et al., 1989; Saflas et al., 2004; Sorensen et al., 2003; Yeo et al., 2000). This reluctance to encourage healthy but sedentary women
to begin an exercise regime is particularly unfortunate as pregnancy
may be a period of particular receptivity to health-promoting suggestions
(Paisley et al., 2003). Furthermore, evidence does support the contention that
women are more likely to exercise during pregnancy if their obstetrician
encourages them to do so (Krans et al., 2005).
Consistent with their reservations regarding exercise initiation,
a majority of obstetricians are more conservative than ACOG guidelines
in terms of exercise intensity and exercise load in the third trimester.
A general skepticism toward the safety and efficacy of exercise
is also reflected in a perceived need for more research and information
on the effects of exercise during pregnancy on pregnancy outcomes.
Taken together, the current findings suggest that practicing obstetricians
are less confident in recommending exercise during pregnancy than
the ACOG guidelines would suggest. Action may be needed to allay
concerns and convince more obstetricians to routinely discuss exercise
with all healthy patients. If that can be done, then it is likely
that exercise will be recommended more often, and the health benefits
of exercise enjoyed by more pregnant women.
|
| ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|
The
authors are grateful for the input and advice of Dr. Diana Herman,
M.D., FACOG and Dr. Elliot Entin, Ph.D.
This experiment was conducted in compliance with all laws of the
United States of America.
|
| KEY
POINTS |
-
52% of surveyed obstetricians discuss exercise with 81-100% of
pregnant patients.
- 68%
of surveyed obstetricians do not regularly advise sedentary pregnant
women to initiate an exercise program.
- 62%
of surveyed obstetricians recommend pregnant patients not exceed
a maximum heart rate during exercise, even though ACOG guidelines
do not specify a maximum heart rate.
- Approximately
half of surveyed obstetricians recommend a reduction in exercise
load during the third trimester, even though ACOG guidelines do
not.
- Regular
exercise was thought by surveyed obstetricians to have some potential
for reducing the risk of gestational diabetes, but little effect
on risk of preeclampsia
|
| AUTHORS
BIOGRAPHY |
Pauline L. ENTIN
Employment: Associate professor of exercise science in the
Department of Biological Sciences at Northern Arizona University.
Degree: PhD.
Research interests: Limits to gas exchange during exercise
E-mail: Pauline.entin@nau.edu
|
|
Kelly
M. MUNHALL
Employment: Southern College of Optometry in Memphis, Tennessee,
USA.
Degree: BS. |
|
|
|
|