scholarly journals Comparison between American Institute of Medicine Guidelines and Local Recommendation for Gestational Weight Gain in Taiwanese Primiparous Women

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Waits ◽  
Chao-Yu Guo ◽  
Li-Yin Chien
Keyword(s):  
Weight Gain ◽  
Gestational Weight Gain ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
American Institute ◽  
Gestational Weight ◽  
Primiparous Women

scholarly journals Comparison between American Institute of Medicine Guidelines and Local Recommendation for Gestational Weight Gain in Taiwanese Primiparous Women

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Waits ◽  
Chao-Yu Guo ◽  
Li-Yin Chien
Keyword(s):  
Weight Gain ◽  
Gestational Weight Gain ◽  
Gestational Age ◽  
Large For Gestational Age ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Weight Retention ◽  
American Institute ◽  
Discriminative Performance ◽  
Gestational Weight

Abstract Background : American Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommends different ranges of gestational weight gain (GWG) based on pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI). In Taiwan, IOM guidelines are implemented concurrently with the local recommendation for GWG (10–14 kg). This study compared between the two sets of guidelines in relation to adverse perinatal outcomes.Methods : We analyzed 31653 primiparas with singletons from 2011-2016 annual National Breastfeeding Surveys. Logistic regressions for preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA), large for gestational age (LGA), cesarean section and excessive postpartum weight retention (PWR) were fitted separately for GWG categorized according to IOM and Taiwan ranges. Areas under the receiver-operator curves (AUC) and the predicted probabilities for each outcome were compared in each BMI group.Results : AUC for both guidelines ranged within 0.51 – 0.73. Compared to Taiwan recommendation, IOM ranges showed lower probabilities of SGA for underweight (0.11–0.15 versus 0.14–0.18), of LGA for obese (0.12–0.15 versus 0.15–0.18), of excessive PWR for overweight (0.19–0.30 versus 0.27–0.39), and obese (0.15–0.22 versus 0.25-0.36); and higher probabilities of excessive PWR for underweight (0.17-0.33 versus 0.14-0.22).Conclusions : Discriminative performance of IOM and Taiwan recommendations was poor for the five adverse birth outcomes, and no preference for either set of recommendations could be inferred from our results. In the absence of specific GWG guidelines, health care workers may provide inconsistent information to their patients. Future research is needed to explore optimal GWG ranges that can reliably predict locally relevant perinatal outcomes for mother and child.

scholarly journals Risk factors for excessive gestational weight gain in a UK population: a biopsychosocial model approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. M. Garay ◽  
L. A. Sumption ◽  
R. M. Pearson ◽  
R. M. John
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Weight Gain ◽  
Gestational Weight Gain ◽  
Biopsychosocial Model ◽  
Elective Caesarean Section ◽  
Depression Symptoms ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
Gestational Weight ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Background Gestational weight gain (GWG) can have implications for the health of both mother and child. However, the contributing factors remain unclear. Despite the advantages of using a biopsychosocial approach, this approach has not been applied to study GWG in the UK. This study aimed to investigate the risk factors of excessive GWG in a UK population, employing a biopsychosocial model. Methods This study utilised data from the longitudinal Grown in Wales (GiW) cohort, which recruited women in late pregnancy in South Wales. Specifically, data was collected from midwife recorded notes and an extensive questionnaire completed prior to an elective caesarean section (ELCS) delivery. GWG was categorised according to Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines. The analysis was undertaken for 275 participants. Results In this population 56.0% of women had excessive GWG. Increased prenatal depression symptoms (Exp(B)=1.10, p=.019) and an overweight (Exp(B)=4.16, p<.001) or obese (Exp(B)=4.20, p=.010) pre-pregnancy BMI, consuming alcohol in pregnancy (Exp(B)=.37, p=.005) and an income of less than £18,000 (Exp(B)=.24, p=.043) and £25–43,000 (Exp(B)=.25, p=.002) were associated with excessive GWG. Conclusion GWG is complex and influenced by a range of biopsychosocial factors, with the high prevalence of excessive weight gain in this population a cause for concern. Women in the UK may benefit from a revised approach toward GWG within the National Health Service (NHS), such as tracking weight gain throughout pregnancy. Additionally, this research provides evidence for potential targets for future interventions, and potentially at-risk populations to target, to improve GWG outcomes.

scholarly journals Review of Trimester-Specific Gestational Weight Gain and Childhood Adiposity

2014 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-53
Author(s):  
K Thapa
Keyword(s):  
Weight Gain ◽  
Childhood Obesity ◽  
Gestational Weight Gain ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Global Epidemic ◽  
Targeted Interventions ◽  
Gestational Weight ◽  
Childhood Adiposity

Childhood obesity is a global epidemic and a major public health challenge. There has been increasing evidence that intrauterine exposures, such as alcohol, smoking, and maternal nutritional status, may affect both the long and short term health consequences of the mother and offspring. Childhood adiposity may be affected by the mother’s pre-pregnancy weight and her weight gain during pregnancy. Consequently, interventions may need to start before conception of the child to prevent childhood obesity. In 2009, the Institute of Medicine updated its gestational weight gain recommendations by incorporating rates of gestational weight gain in the second and third trimesters based on the mother’s pre-pregnancy Body Mass Index. There is extensive research on the association between total gestational weight gain and short-term offspring adiposity. However, this review focuses on the association between trimester-specific gestational weight gain and childhood adiposity for singleton pregnancies with respect to the Institute of Medicine’s newly defined weight gain recommendations as very few studies have examined the association between the gestational weight gain during each trimester and childhood adiposity. Identifying the trimester that is most associated with childhood adiposity may help in the development of targeted interventions, guide physician’s nutritional and weight-gain recommendations for child-bearing mothers, and direct future research. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/jnps.v34i1.8429   J Nepal Paediatr Soc 2014;34(1):48-53

scholarly journals The Behavioral Wellness in Pregnancy study: a randomized controlled trial of a multi-component intervention to promote appropriate weight gain

2019 ◽  
Vol 109 (4) ◽  
pp. 1071-1079
Author(s):  
Lyndi M Buckingham-Schutt ◽  
Laura D Ellingson ◽  
Spyridoula Vazou ◽  
Christina G Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Weight Gain ◽  
Gestational Weight Gain ◽  
Behavioral Intervention ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Weight Retention ◽  
Gestational Weight ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Prepregnancy Weight ◽  
The Face

ABSTRACT Background Adequate weight gain during pregnancy is important to both maternal and fetal outcomes. To date, randomized controlled trials have not been effective at increasing the proportion of women meeting gestational weight-gain guidelines. Objectives The aim of this study was to determine whether a multi-component behavioral intervention with a Registered Dietitian Nutritionist significantly improves the proportion of women who adhere to the 2009 Institute of Medicine weight-gain guidelines. Methods Participants were randomly assigned to usual care (UC; n = 24) or intervention (n = 23) between 8 and 14 weeks of gestation. The intervention included a minimum of 6 one-on-one counseling sessions over ∼30 wk focusing on healthy diet and physical activity (PA) goals. In addition to the face-to-face visits, weekly communication via email supported healthy eating, PA, and appropriate weight gain. Gestational weight gain, PA, and diet were assessed at 8–14, 26–28, and 34–36 weeks of gestation; weight retention was measured 2 mo postpartum. Results The proportion of women meeting the guidelines was significantly greater in those receiving the intervention than UC (60.8% compared with 25.0%, OR: 4.7; 95% CI: 1.3, 16.2; P = 0.019). Furthermore, 36.4% of the intervention women were at or below their prepregnancy weight at 2 mo postpartum compared with 12.5% in the UC group (P = 0.05). Conclusions A multi-component behavioral intervention improved adherence to the 2009 Institute of Medicine weight-gain guidelines. This trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02168647.

scholarly journals Pre-Pregnancy Obesity, Excessive Gestational Weight Gain, and the Risk of Pregnancy-Induced Hypertension and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 1980 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Lewandowska ◽  
Barbara Więckowska ◽  
Stefan Sajdak
Keyword(s):  
Weight Gain ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Gestational Weight Gain ◽  
Pregnancy Complications ◽  
Gestational Hypertension ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Maternal Weight ◽  
Odds Ratios ◽  
Gestational Weight ◽  
The Relationship

Excessive pre-pregnancy weight is a known risk factor of pregnancy complications. The purpose of this analysis was to assess the relationship between several categories of maternal weight and the risk of developing hypertension and diabetes in pregnancy, and the relationship of these complications with the results of the newborn. It was carried out in a common cohort of pregnant women and taking into account the influence of disturbing factors. Our analysis was conducted in a prospective cohort of 912 Polish pregnant women, recruited during 2015–2016. We evaluated the women who subsequently developed diabetes with dietary modification (GDM-1) (n = 125) and with insulin therapy (GDM-2) (n = 21), as well as the women who developed gestational hypertension (GH) (n = 113) and preeclampsia (PE) (n = 24), compared to the healthy controls. Odds ratios of the complications (and confidence intervals (95%)) were calculated in the multivariate logistic regression. In the cohort, 10.8% of the women had pre-pregnancy obesity (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2), and 36.8% had gestational weight gain (GWG) above the range of the Institute of Medicine recommendation. After correction for excessive GWG and other confounders, pre-pregnancy obesity (vs. normal BMI) was associated with a higher odds ratio of GH (AOR = 4.94; p < 0.001), PE (AOR = 8.61; p < 0.001), GDM-1 (AOR = 2.99; p < 0.001), and GDM-2 (AOR = 11.88; p <0.001). The threshold risk of development of GDM-2 occurred at lower BMI values (26.9 kg/m2), compared to GDM-1 (29.1 kg/m2). The threshold point for GH was 24.3 kg/m2, and for PE 23.1 kg/m2. For GWG above the range (vs. GWG in the range), the adjusted odds ratios of GH, PE, GDM-1, and GDM-2 were AOR = 1.71 (p = 0.045), AOR = 1.14 (p = 0.803), AOR = 0.74 (p = 0.245), and AOR = 0.76 (p = 0.672), respectively. The effect of maternal edema on all the results was negligible. In our cohort, hypertension and diabetes were associated with incorrect birth weight and gestational age at delivery. Conclusions: This study highlights the importance and influence of excessive pre-pregnancy maternal weight on the risk of pregnancy complications such as diabetes and hypertension which can impact fetal outcomes.

scholarly journals Optimal gestational weight gain for underweight pregnant women in Japan

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryosuke Shindo ◽  
Mihoko Aoki ◽  
Yuriko Yamamoto ◽  
Toshihiro Misumi ◽  
Etsuko Miyagi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weight Gain ◽  
Gestational Weight Gain ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Optimal Range ◽  
Birth Registry ◽  
Gestational Weight ◽  
Registry System ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Group D

AbstractWe aimed to investigate the optimal range of gestational weight gain (GWG) for Japanese underweight (body mass index <18.5 kg/m2) women using the Japanese Birth Registry System. The study subjects included underweight women who were divided into groups according to the GWG recommendations of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) (9–12 kg): <9.0 kg, group A; 9–12 kg, group B; and >12 kg, group C. The subjects were then classified according to the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) (12.7–18.1 kg): <12.7 kg, group D; 12.7–18.1 kg, group E; and >18.1 kg, group F. In total, 148,135 cases were analysed. The frequencies of small for gestational age, preterm delivery, and caesarean delivery were as follows: 19.3%, 22.7%, and 28.5% for group A; 11.7%, 8.7%, and 22.8% for group B; 8.0%, 4.9%, and 21.5% for group C; 15.0%, 14.7%, and 25.2% for group D; 8.0%, 5.3%, and 21.5% for group E; and 7.0%, 5.5%, and 25.0% for group F, respectively. These results indicated that groups C and E had the best outcomes. Therefore, the IOM guidelines seem more appropriate than the MHLW guidelines. Therefore, the MHLW recommended GWG guidelines require revision.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document