Perceptions of antenatal exercise in pregnant females and the impact of COVID-19

Exercise during pregnancy presents many benefits for the mother and baby. Yet, pregnancy is characterised by a decrease in exercise. Studies have reported barriers to antenatal exercise. The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic may have further exacerbated barriers to antenatal exercise as pregnant females faced many challenges. Rich, in-depth exploration into pregnant female’s perceived barriers to antenatal exercise during COVID-19 is imperative. Questionnaires reporting physical activity levels were completed by all participants (n = 14). Semi-structured interviews were conducted between November 2020 and May 2021 in the UK. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis and revealed four main themes: ‘Perceptions of being an active person shaping activity levels in pregnancy’, ‘How do I know what is right? Uncertainty, seeking validation and feeling informed’, ‘Motivators to antenatal exercise’ and ‘A process of adaptations and adjustment’. Findings indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated barriers to antenatal exercise and highlight the importance of direct psychosocial support and clear, trustworthy information. Findings also support the fundamental need for better education amongst healthcare professionals regarding antenatal exercise

Habitual physical activity levels in women attending the one-stop infertility clinic: a prospective cross-sectional observational study

Optimisation of lifestyle factors such as smoking and alcohol are encouraged to improve fecundability rates in the fertility setting. Currently, routine fertility consultations do not involve counselling or imparting advice regarding habitual physical activity (PA) and/or structured exercise, despite data showing that vigorous PA can be associated with delayed time to pregnancy. Therefore, this study aimed to determine habitual PA in a sample of women attending the one stop infertility (OSI) clinic. 250 women attending a large tertiary level NHS fertility unit prospectively anonymously completed a questionnaire over a period of 9 months. Participant's (mean age 34±5years, mean BMI 29±7kg/m2) habitual PA levels varied from vigorous exercise on ≥5 days/week (8%, n=17), to no moderate or high intensity activities across the whole week (66%, n=29). The majority of women reported no structured exercise (72%, n=179). No association was identified between any domain of PA and BMI, age, alcohol units, regular periods, or time spent trying to conceive (P > 0.05). Participant's habitual PA levels varied widely and no association between any domain of PA and background of the women was identified. No existing evidence and/or guidelines to explicitly inform women attempting to conceive regarding recommended PA levels are available, despite PA being a modifiable, affordable, and feasible lifestyle choice with the possible potential to improve fertility. A large-scale, clinical trial assessing effects of PA on fecundability is warranted to gain insights into the potential of this lifestyle factor to improve fertility outcomes and to explore the underlying biological mechanisms involved

Adherence to unsupervised exercise in sedentary individuals: A randomised feasibility trial of two mobile health interventions

Introduction Adherence to unsupervised exercise is poor, yet unsupervised exercise interventions are utilised in most healthcare settings. Thus, investigating novel ways to enhance adherence to unsupervised exercise is essential. This study aimed to examine the feasibility of two mobile health (mHealth) technology–supported exercise and physical activity (PA) interventions to increase adherence to unsupervised exercise. Methods Eighty-six participants were randomised to online resources ( n  =   44, females n  =   29) or MOTIVATE ( n  =   42, females n  =   28). The online resources group had access to booklets and videos to assist in performing a progressive exercise programme. MOTIVATE participants received exercise counselling sessions supported via mHealth biometrics which allowed instant participant feedback on exercise intensity, and communication with an exercise specialist. Heart rate (HR) monitoring, survey-reported exercise behaviour and accelerometer-derived PA were used to quantify adherence. Remote measurement techniques were used to assess anthropometrics, blood pressure, HbA 1c and lipid profiles. Results HR–derived adherence rates were 22   ±   34% and 113   ±   68% in the online resources and MOTIVATE groups, respectively. Self-reported exercise behaviour demonstrated moderate (Cohen's d  =   0.63, CI   =   0.27 to 0.99) and large effects (Cohen's d  =   0.88, CI   =   0.49 to 1.26) in favour of online resources and MOTIVATE groups, respectively. When dropouts were included, 84% of remotely gathered data were available, with dropouts removed data availability was 94%. Conclusion Data suggest both interventions have a positive impact on adherence to unsupervised exercise but MOTIVATE enables participants to meet recommended exercise guidelines. Nevertheless, to maximise adherence to unsupervised exercise, future appropriately powered trials should explore the effectiveness of the MOTIVATE intervention