Combining the Antenatal Risk Questionnaire and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale in Early Pregnancy in Danish Antenatal Care-A Qualitative Descriptive Study.

Pregnant women with a history of mental disorders, neglect, or low social support are at increased risk of mental health problems. It is crucial to identify psychosocial risk factors in early pregnancy to reduce the risk of short- and long-term health consequences for mother and child. The Antenatal Risk Questionnaire has been found acceptable as a psychosocial screening tool among pregnant women in Australia, but it has not been tested in a Scandinavian context. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of pregnant women when using the Antenatal Risk Questionnaire and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale as part of a model to identify psychosocial vulnerabilities in pregnancy in Denmark. We conducted individual interviews (n = 18) and used thematic analysis. We identified two main themes: (1) Feeling heard and (2) An occasion for self-reflection. Overall, the pregnant women deemed the online ANRQ/EPDS acceptable as a screening tool. The screening model provided a feeling of being heard and provided an occasion for self-reflection about mental health challenges related to pregnancy and motherhood. However, some women expressed that the screening raised concerns and fear of the consequences of answering honestly. A non-judgmental, open, emphatic, and reassuring approach by clinicians may help reduce stigma.

The effect of exercise training and motivational counselling on physical activity behaviour and psychosocial factors in pregnant women: secondary analyses of the FitMum randomised controlled trial investigating prenatal physical activity.

BACKGROUND: A physically active lifestyle is beneficial during pregnancy. However, little is known about physical activity (PA) behaviour and psychosocial factors in women during and after pregnancy. This study examined exercise behavioural regulation, exercise self-efficacy, health-related quality of life, sickness absence and musculoskeletal pain in pregnant women offered either structured supervised exercise training, motivational counselling on PA, or standard prenatal care in the FitMum randomised controlled trial. METHODS: Two hundred and eighteen healthy inactive pregnant women were randomised to structured supervised exercise training (n = 87), motivational counselling on PA (n = 86) or standard prenatal care (n = 45). The women answered the Behavioural Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-2 (BREQ-2), the Pregnancy Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale (P-ESES-DK) and the Short Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire (SF-36) at baseline (gestational age (GA) of max 15 weeks), GA 28 and 34 weeks, and one year after delivery. Sickness absence and low back and/or pelvic girdle pain were likewise reported in questionnaires at baseline and GA 28 weeks. RESULTS: Participants offered structured supervised exercise training or motivational counselling on PA had higher autonomous motivation for exercise during pregnancy compared with participants receiving standard prenatal care (e.g., difference in intrinsic regulation at GA 28 weeks, structured supervised exercise training vs. standard prenatal care: mean difference in score 0.39 [0.16; 0.64], p < 0.001). Participants offered structured supervised exercise training also had higher exercise self-efficacy during pregnancy (e.g., GA 28 weeks, structured supervised exercise training vs. standard prenatal care: mean difference in score 6.97 [2.05; 12.02], p = 0.005). All participants reported high exercise self-efficacy at baseline and medium exercise self-efficacy during pregnancy and one year after delivery. No differences were found between groups in health-related quality of life, sickness absence or low back and/or pelvic girdle pain during pregnancy. No group differences were found one year after delivery. CONCLUSION: Structured supervised exercise training and motivational counselling on PA had important effects on autonomous exercise motivation during pregnancy. Exercise self-efficacy was also increased with structured supervised exercise training compared to standard prenatal care. No group differences in health-related quality of life, sickness absence, or pain were found during and after pregnancy. No effects were found one year post-delivery after intervention cessation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the Danish National Committee on Health Research Ethics (#H-18011067) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (#P-2019-512). The study adheres to the principles of the Helsinki declaration. Written informed consent was obtained at inclusion.

Counselling on physical activity in Danish antenatal care: A qualitative study of experiences from both the pregnant woman's and the care provider's perspective.

OBJECTIVES: Physical activity during pregnancy is beneficial to maternal and fetal health, but most pregnant women do not achieve the recommended level of physical activity. To investigate how antenatal care can promote physical activity during pregnancy, this study explores experiences of physical activity counselling from the perspectives of pregnant women and antenatal care providers. METHODS: In a qualitative design with an inductive approach individual semi-structured interviews with 19 pregnant women and seven antenatal care providers were performed and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The themes "Experiencing inadequate counselling", "Benefiting from individualized guidance", and "Voicing a need for enhanced support" cover the perspectives from the participating pregnant women. They often experienced insufficient physical activity counselling that left them insecure about proper physical activity during pregnancy. The pregnant women desired individualized and concrete advice and early and continuous support. From antenatal care providers the themes "Providers' perceived barriers in counselling", "Balancing the act of counselling", and "Acknowledging potential for enhanced counselling" were identified. They perceived barriers towards counselling including time restraints, lack of interest, and doubts about certain physical activity during pregnancy but expressed trying to adjust the counselling to meet the woman's individual situation. They acknowledged that continuous support during pregnancy and updated knowledge and increased focus among providers might improve physical activity counselling. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women received scarce counselling on physical activity in antenatal care, while care providers described several barriers towards counselling on physical activity. Both pregnant women and antenatal care providers recognized opportunities for enhanced physical activity counselling.

Effects of Two Physical Activity Interventions on Sleep and Sedentary Time in Pregnant Women.

Pregnancy is often associated with poor sleep and high sedentary time (SED). We investigated the effect of physical activity (PA) interventions on sleep and SED in pregnant women. A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (n = 219) explored the effect of structured supervised exercise training (EXE) or motivational counseling on PA (MOT) compared to standard prenatal care (CON) on sleep and SED during pregnancy. Three times during pregnancy, sleep was determined by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and SED by the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire (PPAQ). Also, a wrist-worn consumer activity tracker measured sleep and SED continuously. Data from the activity tracker confirmed that sleep time decreases, and SED increases by approx. 30 and 24 min/day, respectively, from baseline (maximum gestational age (GA) week 15) to delivery. Compared to CON, the global PSQI score was better for EXE in GA week 28 (-0.8 [-1.5; -0.1], p = 0.031) and for both EXE and MOT in GA week 34 (-1 [-2; -0.5], p = 0.002; -1 [-2; -0.1], p = 0.026). In GA week 28, SED (h/day) from PPAQ was lower in EXE compared to both CON and MOT (-0.69 [-1; -0.0], p = 0.049; -0.6 [-1.0; -0.02], p = 0.042). In conclusion, PA interventions during pregnancy improved sleep quality and reduced SED.

Effects of prenatal exercise on gestational weight gain, obstetric and neonatal outcomes: FitMum randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effects of two different exercise interventions during pregnancy on gestational weight gain (GWG) and obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared to standard care. Additionally, we aimed to improve standardization of GWG measurements by developing a model to estimate GWG for a standardized pregnancy period of 40 weeks and 0 days accounting for individual differences in gestational age (GA) at delivery. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial we compared the effects of structured supervised exercise training (EXE) three times per week throughout pregnancy versus motivational counselling on physical activity (MOT) seven times during pregnancy with standard care (CON) on GWG and obstetric and neonatal outcomes. Uniquely, to estimate GWG for a standardized pregnancy period, we developed a novel model to predict GWG based on longitudinally observed body weights during pregnancy and at admission for delivery. Observed weights were fitted to a mixed effects model that was used to predict maternal body weight and estimate GWG at different gestational ages. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes, among them gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and birth weight, were obtained after delivery. GWG and the investigated obstetric and neonatal outcomes are secondary outcomes of the randomized controlled trial, which might be underpowered to detect intervention effects on these outcomes. RESULTS: From 2018-2020, 219 healthy, inactive pregnant women with median pre-pregnancy BMI of 24.1 (21.8-28.7) kg/m2 were included at median GA 12.9 (9.4-13.9) weeks and randomized to EXE (n = 87), MOT (n = 87) or CON (n = 45). In total 178 (81%) completed the study. GWG at GA 40 weeks and 0 days did not differ between groups (CON: 14.9 kg [95% CI, 13.6;16.1]; EXE: 15.7 kg [14.7;16.7]; MOT: 15.0 kg [13.6;16.4], p = 0.538), neither did obstetric nor neonatal outcomes. For example, there were no differences between groups in the proportions of participants developing GDM (CON: 6%, EXE: 7%, MOT: 7%, p = 1.000) or in birth weight (CON: 3630 (3024-3899), EXE: 3768 (3410-4069), MOT: 3665 (3266-3880), p = 0.083). CONCLUSIONS: Neither structured supervised exercise training nor motivational counselling on physical activity during pregnancy affected GWG or obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared to standard care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03679130; 20/09/2018.

Adherence to recommended physical activity restrictions due to threatened preterm delivery - a descriptive multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: Threatened preterm delivery is a serious obstetrical complication and has for decades been prescribed physical activity restrictions (AR). Adherence to the recommended level of physical AR is however unknown. This study aimed to assess the objectively measured different physical positions and activities of pregnant women recommended AR due to threatened preterm delivery complications, compared to a reference group of uncomplicated pregnant women without restrictions, and to explore if admission status influenced adherence to AR. METHODS: A Danish descriptive, clinical multi-center study included singleton pregnancies between 22-33 gestational weeks admitted to an antenatal ward or during midwife consultations either prescribed AR due to threatened preterm delivery or uncomplicated controls without restrictions. For seven days participants wore two tri-axial accelerometric SENS® monitors. Accelerometric data included time spent in five different positions, activities, and step counts. At inclusion demographic and obstetric information was collected. RESULTS: Seventy-two pregnant women participated; 31% were prescribed strict AR, 15% moderate, 3% light, 8% unspecified, and 43% had no AR. Strict AR participants rested in the supine/lateral position for 17.7 median hours/day (range:9.6-24.0); sat upright 4.9 h/day (0.11-11.7); took 1,520steps/day (20-5,482), and 64% were inpatients. Moderate AR participants rested in the supine/lateral position for 15.1 h/day (11.5-21.6); sat upright 5.6 h/day (2.0-9.3); took 3,310steps/day (467-6,968), and 64% were outpatients. Participants with no AR rested 10.5 h/day (6.3-15.4) in supine/lateral position; sat upright 7.6 h/day (0.1-11.4) and took 9,235steps/day (3,225-20,818). Compared to no restrictions, participants with strict or moderate AR spent significant more time in physical resting positions and took significant fewer mean steps. Among strict AR admission status did not alter time spent in the physical positions, nor the step count. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, participants adhered highly to the recommended AR. However, discriminating between strict and moderate AR recommendations did not alter how physical resting positions and activities were carried out. The admission status did not influence how participants adhered to strict AR.

Physical activity in pregnancy: a mixed methods process evaluation of the FitMum randomised controlled trial interventions.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) at moderate intensity is recommended for healthy pregnant women. The three-arm FitMum randomised controlled trial showed that it was possible to increase PA level during pregnancy with structured supervised exercise training (EXE) compared to standard care. Motivational counselling on PA (MOT) did not increase PA. This process evaluation aims to understand the implementation and mechanisms of impact of EXE and MOT. METHODS: A mixed methods process evaluation was conducted using the UK Medical Research Council's process evaluation framework by assessing implementation (reach, fidelity, and dose) and mechanisms of impact of the two interventions provided to pregnant women in FitMum. Data was collected both quantitatively (n = 220) and qualitatively (n = 20). RESULTS: The FitMum trial reached educated pregnant women (80% having an educational level ≥ bachelor's degree) with high autonomy of everyday life. Most participants (58%) were recruited at their first-trimester ultrasonic scan. Reasons to participate were personal (91%) and altruistic (56%). The intervention dose was delivered as intended with high fidelity in the original physical intervention setup and in the altered online setup during the COVID-19 restrictions. A low dose received in EXE (1.3 [95% CI, 1.1; 1.5] sessions/week) was partly explained by the pre-scheduled EXE sessions favouring participants with a flexible everyday life and a supportive social network. Dose received in EXE increased during online intervention delivery. Participants in MOT received 5.2 [4.7; 5.7] of 7 sessions. Mechanisms of impact comprised a perception of intervention commitment among participants in EXE due to the scheduled EXE sessions, whereas participants in MOT considered themselves as PA self-determined. PA was considered as constrained activities in EXE and included in daily activities in MOT. CONCLUSION: The FitMum interventions was delivered with high fidelity. During COVID-19, the dose received in EXE increased compared to the previous physical setup. Mechanisms of impact as commitment, perception of empowerment and perception of PA as well as the paradox between prioritising PA and family and the need of a flexible everyday life need to be considered when offering pregnant women PA interventions. Future interventions should consider a combination of physical and online exercise training for pregnant women.

Effects of Structured Supervised Exercise Training or Motivational Counseling on Pregnant Women's Physical Activity Level: FitMum - Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) during pregnancy is an effective and safe way to improve maternal health in uncomplicated pregnancies. However, compliance with PA recommendations remains low among pregnant women. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of offering structured supervised exercise training (EXE) or motivational counseling on PA (MOT) during pregnancy on moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA) level. Additionally, complementary measures of PA using the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire (PPAQ) and gold standard doubly labeled water (DLW) technique were investigated. The hypotheses were that both EXE and MOT would increase MVPA in pregnancy compared with standard care (CON) and that EXE would be more effective than MOT. In addition, the association between MVPA and the number of sessions attended was explored. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial included 220 healthy, inactive pregnant women with a median gestational age of 12.9 (IQR 9.4-13.9) weeks. A total of 219 women were randomized to CON (45/219), EXE (87/219), or MOT (87/219). The primary outcome was MVPA (minutes per week) from randomization to the 29th gestational week obtained by a wrist-worn commercial activity tracker (Vivosport, Garmin International). PA was measured by the activity tracker throughout pregnancy, PPAQ, and DLW. The primary outcome analysis was performed as an analysis of covariance model adjusting for baseline PA. RESULTS: The average MVPA (minutes per week) from randomization to the 29th gestational week was 33 (95% CI 18 to 47) in CON, 50 (95% CI 39 to 60) in EXE, and 40 (95% CI 30 to 51) in MOT. When adjusted for baseline MVPA, participants in EXE performed 20 (95% CI 4 to 36) minutes per week more MVPA than participants in CON (P=.02). MOT was not more effective than CON; EXE and MOT also did not differ. MVPA was positively associated with the number of exercise sessions attended in EXE from randomization to delivery (P=.04). Attendance was higher for online (due to COVID-19 restrictions) compared with physical exercise training (P=.03). Adverse events and serious adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Offering EXE was more effective than CON to increase MVPA among pregnant women, whereas offering MOT was not. MVPA in the intervention groups did not reach the recommended level in pregnancy. Changing the intervention to online due to COVID-19 restrictions did not affect MVPA level but increased exercise participation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03679130; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03679130. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043671.

Pregnant womens views on the timing of prophylactic antibiotics during caesarean delivery: A qualitative semi-structured interview study.

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight into pregnant women's preferences if given a choice between getting antibiotic prophylaxis before or after cord clamping during caesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: A qualitative semi-structured interview-study. The interviews were conducted at a Danish Hospital, with about 4000 deliveries a year. Fourteen individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with pregnant women, either considering or having a planned caesarean section, or scheduled for induction due to post-term gestational age. A systematic text condensation approach was used to analyze the transcribed interviews. RESULTS: Ten of the fourteen women favored antibiotic administration after cord clamping. Despite any adverse effects to the infant's microbiota and increased risk of long-term health outcomes were only hypothetical and the risk reduction in postpartum infections being well documented, they did not want to expose their offspring to antibiotics. Those who preferred antibiotic prophylaxis before cord clamping were concerned, if they would be able to care for the infant in case of a maternal infection. Three of the women preferring antibiotics after cord clamping said they would potentially change preference, if the maternal risk was higher. Most women preferred to be informed of the use of prophylactic antibiotic and that the timing has consequences for trans-placental exposure to the infant. CONCLUSIONS: With most of the interviewed women preferring antibiotic administration after cord clamping, we suggest patients should be involved in the decision regarding timing of prophylactic antibiotics before caesarean section.

Cross-cultural adaption, translation and reliability tests of the Danish version of the Pregnancy Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale.

OBJECTIVE: Self-efficacy has been shown to influence initiating and maintaining physical activity. Pregnancy often leads to a decline in physical activity and exercise self-efficacy assessments could be a tool to help women stay active during pregnancy. The Pregnancy Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale (P-ESES) is an English questionnaire assessing the self-efficacy in pregnant women to perform physical activity. The aim of this study was to translate the P-ESES questionnaire into a valid and reliable Danish version, P-ESES-DK. STUDY DESIGN: The study included a qualitative design for the validation of the questionnaire and a prospective longitudinal observational study for the reliability testing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The questionnaire was translated into Danish in a four-stage process with translation, back-translation and synthesis. The pre-final version was tested by eight women and changes were made to complete the final version of P-ESES-DK. The reliability testing was performed using a test-retest analysis of P-ESES-DK with 75 Danish pregnant women. Reliability was assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), Cronbach's alpha and agreement was visualized using a Bland-Altman plot. RESULTS: The questionnaire was found to have a good content validity. The assessment of the test re-test reliability showed an ICC of 0.809 and a Cronbach's alpha of the test and re-test were 0.839 and 0.869, respectively. The Bland-Altman plot showed that 93.9% of the answers were within the 95% limits of agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The Danish version of P-ESES was found to be both reliable and valid. Thus, it can be used as a helpful tool to measure self-efficacy related to physical activity during pregnancy.

Induction of labor with high- or low-dosage oral misoprostol-A Danish descriptive retrospective cohort study 2015-16.

INTRODUCTION: In Denmark, the rate of induced labor from 37 gestational weeks has increased by 108% from 12.4% in 2000 to 25.1% in 2012, and today more than 1 in 4 deliveries are induced. Standard procedure at North Zealand Hospital changed in 2016 from a dosage of 50 µg oral misoprostol 2-3 times daily, to 25 µg up to 8 times daily. Also, since 2016 healthy women with uncomplicated pregnancies (primiparous and multiparous) have been offered induction as an outpatient procedure. This study aimed to compare the current low-dosage procedure (25 µg) with the former high-dosage procedure (50 µg) in terms of induction to delivery time, maternal and fetal outcomes, and risk of uterine hyperstimulation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from June 2015 to October 2016 were included. Comparable baseline, demographic, and obstetric data for women induced according to high-dosage or low-dosage protocols were retrieved from local medical files. Descriptive statistics, Pearson's chi-squared tests, Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, and logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: The study included 816 induced deliveries. The high- and low-dosage groups differed in rates of plurality and place of induction. Induction to delivery times lasting longer than 72 hours were significantly decreased in the low-dosage group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.27 to 0.86). Women in the low-dosage group also less often needed additional induction (P = 0.02), and the rate of uterine hyperstimulation was low irrespective of protocol (1% vs 3%, P = 0.16). There were no cases of uterine rupture in either group. The probability of vaginal delivery in the low-dosage group increased (adjusted hazard ratio 1.27, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.49), as did the risk of delivery with vacuum extraction (aOR 2.27, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.15), whereas delivery by cesarean section slightly decreased (aOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.33). The risk of meconium-stained liquor was nonsignificantly decreased (aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.23). CONCLUSIONS: The low-dosage induction protocol was associated with favorable obstetric outcomes in terms of increased probability of vaginal delivery, but with higher risk of vacuum extraction. Protracted inductions and additional nonmedical interventions were reduced. There were no cases of uterine rupture. Statistically nonsignificant, the risk of uterine hyperstimulation was increased whereas the risk of meconium-stained liquor and of cesarean section was slightly decreased.

Low back pain intensity among childbearing women and associated predictors. A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is a common condition among childbearing women, causing physical disability and an increased risk of sick leave and obstetric complications. AIMS: To assess the prevalence and intensity of low back pain during pregnancy, to describe the physical disability and sick leave in relation to the severity of low back pain and to identify predictors of moderate to severe low back pain in socio-demographic, health and obstetric characteristics among childbearing women. METHODS: A cohort study was undertaken (n=566) during August 2015 to March 2016. Questionnaires were used to obtain information about low back pain intensity, physical disability due to low back pain and sick leave at 20 and 32weeks of gestation. Of the 654 eligible women, 87% completed the first questionnaire. FINDINGS: Three out of four reported any low back pain at 20weeks of gestation, and nine out of ten women at 32weeks. Of these women, one in three reported moderate to severe pain at 20weeks, increasing to half of the women at 32weeks. Both sick leave and physical disability increased with increasing low back pain scores. Pre-pregnancy low back pain, multiparity and lower level of education were all identified as predictors of moderate to severe low back pain. CONCLUSIONS: Women with pre-pregnancy low back pain, multiparity and lower level of education, represent the group of women with the highest risk of moderate to severe low back pain during pregnancy and should be payed special attention.