Pre-pregnancy weight status, early pregnancy lipid profile and blood pressure course during pregnancy: The ABCD study.

OBJECTIVE: Although pre-pregnancy weight status and early pregnancy lipid profile are known to influence blood pressure course during pregnancy, little is known about how these two factors interact. The association between pre-pregnancy weight status and blood pressure course during pregnancy was assessed in the prospective ABCD study and the role (independent/mediating/moderating) of early pregnancy lipid profile in this association was determined. METHODS: We included 2500 normal weight (<25 kg/m2) and 600 overweight (≥25 kg/m2) women from the prospective ABCD-study with available measurements of non-fasting early pregnancy lipids [median (IQR): 13 (12-14) weeks of gestation] and blood pressure during pregnancy [mean (SD) = 10 (2.3)]. Lipids (triglycerides, total cholesterol, apolipoprotein A1, apolipoprotein B and free fatty acids) were divided into tertiles. Multilevel piecewise linear spline models were used to describe the course of systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) in four time periods during gestation for overweight and normal weight women. RESULTS: Both SBP (5.3 mmHg) and DBP (3.9 mmHg) were higher in overweight compared to normal weight women and this difference remained the same over all four time periods. The difference in SBP and DBP was not mediated or moderated by the lipid profile. Lipid profile had an independent positive effect on both SBP (range 1.3-2.2 mmHg) and DBP (0.8-1.1 mmHg), but did not change blood pressure course. CONCLUSIONS: Both pre-pregnancy weight status and early pregnancy lipid profile independently increase blood pressure during pregnancy. Improving pre-pregnancy weight status and early pregnancy lipid profile might result in a healthier blood pressure course during pregnancy.

Recommendations and Improvements for the Evaluation of Integrated Community-Wide Interventions Approaches.

Background. Integrated community-wide intervention approaches (ICIAs) are implemented to prevent childhood obesity. Programme evaluation improves these ICIAs, but professionals involved often struggle with performance. Evaluation tools have been developed to support Dutch professionals involved in ICIAs. It is unclear how useful these tools are to intended users. We therefore researched the facilitators of and barriers to ICIA programme evaluation as perceived by professionals and their experiences of the evaluation tools. Methods. Focus groups and interviews with 33 public health professionals. Data were analysed using a thematic content approach. Findings. Evaluation is hampered by insufficient time, budget, and experience with ICIAs, lack of leadership, and limited advocacy for evaluation. Epidemiologists are regarded as responsible for evaluation but feel incompetent to perform evaluation or advocate its need in a political environment. Managers did not prioritise process evaluations, involvement of stakeholders, and capacity building. The evaluation tools are perceived as valuable but too comprehensive considering limited resources. Conclusion. Evaluating ICIAs is important but most professionals are unfamiliar with it and management does not prioritise process evaluation nor incentivize professionals to evaluate. To optimise programme evaluation, more resources and coaching are required to improve professionals' evaluation capabilities and specifically the use of evaluation.