Association of child weight with attendance at a healthy lifestyle service among women with obesity during pregnancy.

Women with obesity during pregnancy are at increased risk of excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) and other maternal and infant adverse outcomes, which all potentially increase childhood obesity. This study explored infant weight outcomes for women with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 35 kg/m² who were offered an antenatal healthy lifestyle service. A retrospective cohort study, including linking data from two separate health care Trusts, was undertaken. Data were collected from maternity records for women with a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 referred to an antenatal healthy lifestyle service from 2009 to 2015. The respective child's weight outcome data was additionally collected from health and National Child Measurement Programme records. Univariate logistic regression determined the odds of childhood overweight, obesity and severe obesity according to attendance at the antenatal healthy lifestyle service, GWG and sociodemographic characteristics. Factors significant (p < 0.05) within the univariate analysis were entered into multiple logistic regression models. Among women with a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m², 30.4% of their children were obese at school entry and 13.3% severely obese. Healthy lifestyle service attendance was not associated with childhood overweight or obesity at any point within the univariate analysis. At school age multiple regression analysis showed the odds of overweight and obesity increased with excessive GWG and the odds of obesity decreased with a parent in a professional occupation, additionally having a mother who smoked in pregnancy increased severe obesity. Women should be supported to optimise their BMI before pregnancy. Additionally, rather than exclusively focusing on changing an individual's behaviour, future interventions should consider external influences such as the woman's family, friends and sociodemographic background.

Factors associated with gestational weight gain in women with morbid obesity.

BACKGROUND: Women with obesity are at increased risk of excessive gestational weight gain. Women with a body mass index (BMI) of 40 kg/m2 or more are known to have different patterns of weight gain than women with lower levels of obesity. This study therefore aimed to determine the characteristics associated with gestational weight gain (GWG) among women with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or more. METHODS: Secondary analysis was undertaken on a retrospective cohort of women with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or more, with a singleton pregnancy referred to an antenatal healthy lifestyle service between 2009 and 2015 (n = 735). GWG was calculated by subtracting weight at the first antenatal appointment from final recorded weight in pregnancy provided the final weight was recorded from at least 34 + 0 weeks gestation. Univariable and multiple linear regression analyses were employed to determine the association between GWG and different maternal and infant characteristics. RESULTS: Average GWG among women with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or more was 6.0 (±7.1)kg. Multiple regression showed GWG decreased with increasing BMI and increasing parity. Other socio-demographic factors were also significantly associated with GWG, with higher GWG seen among those with high levels of deprivation, where the highest household occupation was of a manual nature, in older women and women of non-White British ethnicity. CONCLUSION: GWG in this cohort of women with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or more was within Institute of Medicine recommendations. Using a systems approach to GWG management that incorporates biological, psychological and socio-ecological factors is important.

Women with the highest levels of obesity are known to have different patterns of weight gain during pregnancy than other women. This study looked at what factors were linked to pregnancy weight gain in women with the highest levels of obesity. Pregnancy weight gain was calculated by subtracting the woman's weight at her first pregnancy appointment from her weight at the end of pregnancy, providing she was at least 34 weeks pregnant when she was weighed.The higher the woman's body mass index above 40 kg/m² at the start of pregnancy, the less weight they gained in pregnancy. Women gained less weight during pregnancy if they already had one or more children rather than were having their first baby or if they lived in households where no one worked. Weight gain was also linked to whether the woman lived in a deprived area and weight gain was higher in women from an ethnic minority. In the future any interventions during pregnancy to help women gain the correct amount of weight need to consider multiple things including how many children they already have, as well as the influence of the woman's family and friends and where the woman lives.

The impact of Baby Friendly Initiative accreditation: An overview of systematic reviews.

Despite its reported benefits, breastfeeding rates are low globally, and support systems such as the Baby Friendly Initiative (BFI) have been established to support healthy infant feeding practices and infant bonding. Increasingly reviews are being undertaken to assess the overall impact of BFI accreditation. A systematic synthesis of current reviews has therefore been carried out to examine the state of literature on the effects of BFI accreditation. A systematic search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, Maternal and Infant Health, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and PROSPERO was undertaken. Study selection, data extraction and critical appraisal of included reviews using the AMSTAR-2 tool were undertaken by two authors, with disagreements resolved through discussion with the third author. Due to heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis of findings was applied. Fourteen reviews met the inclusion criteria. Overall confidence in the results of the review was rated as high for three reviews, low for two reviews and critically low for nine reviews. Most evidence suggests some increase in breastfeeding initiation, exclusivity and duration of breastfeeding, and one main trial suggests decreased gastrointestinal infection and allergic dermatitis in infants. However, overall certainty in the evidence was rated as very low across all outcomes due to concerns over risk of bias within and heterogeneity between the original studies. More contemporary, good-quality randomised controlled trials or well-controlled prospective comparative cohorts are required to better evaluate the impact of full BFI accreditation, with particular attention paid to the context of the research and to long-term maternal and infant health outcomes.

Interventions for supporting the initiation and continuation of breastfeeding among women who are overweight or obese.

BACKGROUND: Exclusive breastfeeding is recommended for all infants until six months of age due to the many health benefits for both the mother and infant.Evidence suggests that mothers who are overweight (body mass index (BMI) 25.0 to 29.9 kg/m²) or obese (BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m²) are less likely to initiate breastfeeding and to breastfeed for a shorter duration. Considering the rising prevalence of overweight and obesity globally and the known benefits of breastfeeding particularly in reducing the long-term risks of obesity and diabetes for infants, establishing effective ways to support and promote breastfeeding in women who are overweight or obese is paramount in achieving the goal of healthier communities. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of interventions to support the initiation or continuation of breastfeeding in women who are overweight or obese. SEARCH METHODS: On 23 January 2019 we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and reference lists of retrieved trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared interventions to support the initiation and continuation of breastfeeding in women who are overweight or obese. Interventions included social support, education, physical support, or any combination of these. Interventions were compared either with each other or against a control group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed all potential trials identified from the search strategy. Two review authors extracted data from each included trial and assessed risk of bias. We resolved discrepancies through discussion with the third review author. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We found no trials comparing one type of support versus another. We included seven RCTs (including one cluster-RCT) involving 831 women. The number of women in each trial ranged from 36 to 226. The trials were conducted in high-income countries: USA (5 trials); Denmark (1 trial) and Australia (1 trial), between 2006 and 2015. Three trials only included women who were obese prior to pregnancy and four trials included both women who were overweight and women who were obese. We judged risk of bias in the included trials to be mixed; only one trial was judged to be low risk of bias for random sequence generation, allocation concealment and attrition bias.Physical breastfeeding support (manual or electric breast pump) versus usual care (no breast pump)Very low-certainty evidence from one small trial (39 women) looking at a physical support intervention (manual or electric breast pump) versus usual care (no pump) means it is unclear whether physical support improves exclusive breastfeeding at four to six weeks (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 1.51) or any breastfeeding at four to six weeks (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.03). The trial did not report other important outcomes of interest in this review: non-initiation of breastfeeding, exclusive or any breastfeeding at six months postpartum.Multiple methods of breastfeeding support versus usual care Six trials (involving 792 women) used multiple methods of support including education and social support through telephone or face-to-face contact. One of these trials also provided physical support through providing a breast pump and a baby sling and one trial provided a small gift to the women at each trial visit. Support in the trials was provided by a professional (four trials) or a peer (two trials). One trial provided group support, with the other five trials supporting women individually. One trial (174 women) did not report on any of our main outcomes of interest.We are unclear about the effects of the intervention because we identified very low-certainty evidence for all of the important outcomes in this review: rate of non-initiation of breastfeeding (average RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.11; 3 trials, 380 women); exclusive breastfeeding at four to six weeks (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.77; 4 trials, 445 women); any breastfeeding at four to six weeks (average RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.89; 2 trials, 103 women); rate of exclusive breastfeeding at six months postpartum (RR 7.23, 95% CI 0.38 to 137.08; 1 trial, 120 women); and any breastfeeding at six months postpartum (average RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.87; 2 trials, 223 women).The included trials under the above comparisons also reported on some of this review's secondary outcomes but very low-certainty evidence means that we are unclear about the effects of the intervention on those outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to assess the effectiveness of physical interventions, or multiple methods of support (social, educational or physical) for supporting the initiation or continuation of breastfeeding in women who are overweight or obese. We found no RCTs comparing one type of support to another type of support. All of our GRADE assessments resulted in very low-certainty evidence, with downgrading decisions based on limitations in trial design (e.g. risk of attrition bias), imprecision, inconsistency. The available trials were mostly of variable quality with small numbers of participants, confounded by poor adherence within both the intervention and control groups.Well designed, adequately powered research is needed to answer questions about the social, educational, physical support, or any combination of these interventions that could potentially help mothers who are overweight or obese to achieve optimal breastfeeding outcomes. We need trials that examine interventions designed specifically for women who are overweight or obese, delivered by people with training about how to overcome some of the challenges these women face when establishing and maintaining breastfeeding. Particular attention could be given to the assessment of antenatal interventions aimed at improving breastfeeding initiation in women with a raised BMI, and not just focusing on recruiting women who have an intention to breastfeed. Given that the majority of current trials were undertaken in the USA, further trials in a diverse range of countries and settings are required. Future trials need to give consideration to the theoretical basis of the intervention using established frameworks to enable replicability by others and to better determine the components of effective interventions.

Women's perspectives on antenatal breast expression: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The practice of antenatal breast expression (ABE) has been proposed as a strategy to promote successful breastfeeding. Although there has been some focus on the evaluation of the effects of ABE in promotion of breastfeeding, little or no evidence exists on women's experiences of ABE or opinions on ABE, particularly amongst overweight or obese women. METHODS: This study aimed to explore women's knowledge, practices and opinions of ABE, and any differences within the overweight and obese subgroups. A cross-sectional survey was undertaken using an online questionnaire distributed by a maternity user group representative via social media. Quantitative data were analysed using Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests in SPSS. Simple thematic analysis was used for the qualitative data. RESULTS: A total of 688 responses were analysed; the sample represented a group of breastfeeding mothers, of whom 64.5% had heard of ABE, 8.2% had been advised to do ABE, and 14.2% had undertaken ABE. Of the women who had been advised to do ABE, 67.9% had complied. Most participants (58.6%) were unsure if ABE was a good idea; however 80.9% would consider doing ABE if it was found to be helpful to prepare for breastfeeding. Women in the overweight or obese subgroups were significantly more likely to have heard of ABE (p < 0.001), and positive opinion of ABE also increased with higher BMI groups. The qualitative data demonstrated participants felt ABE may be beneficial when mother or baby have medical problems, and in preparation for breastfeeding, but highlighted their concerns that it may interfere with nature and be harmful, and that they wanted more information and knowledge about ABE. CONCLUSIONS: Amongst women who have breastfed, many have heard of ABE, compliance with advice to undertake ABE is relatively high, and ABE is considered an acceptable practice. Further investigation into the benefits and safety of ABE is warranted, to address the needs of childbearing women for evidence-based information about this practice. If the evidence base is established, overweight and obese pregnant women could be an important target group for this intervention.

Pre-pregnancy body mass index and gestational weight gain and their effects on pregnancy and birth outcomes: a cohort study in West Sumatra, Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: Indonesia has a considerably high incidence of maternal and infant mortality. The country has however been experiencing a social and economic transition, influencing its general population demographics and nutritional status including the state of health and nutrition of pregnant women. This study aimed to explore body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain (GWG), and their relationship with pregnancy outcomes in a sample of Indonesian pregnant women. METHODS: This observational cohort study included a total of 607 pregnant women who were recruited in 2010 from maternity clinics in Western Sumatra, Indonesia. Multiple logistic and regression analyses were undertaken to compare pregnancy and birth outcomes for different BMI and GWG, using normal weight women and women with a recommended weight gain as the referent groups. RESULTS: The prevalence of underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m2) in pregnancy was high at 20.1%; while 21.7% of women were overweight (BMI: 23.0-27.4 kg/m2) and 5.3% obese (BMI ≥ 27.5 kg/m2) using the Asian BMI classifications. The incidence of overweight (BMI: 25.0-29.9 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m2) according to the international BMI classifications were 13.5% and 1.1% respectively. The majority of women gained inadequate weight in pregnancy compared to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations, especially those who had a normal BMI. Birthweight adjusted mean difference aMD (95% confidence interval) 205 (46,365) and the odds of macrosomia adjusted odds ratio aOR 13.46 (2.32-77.99) significantly increased in obese women compared to those with a normal BMI. Birthweight aMD -139 (-215, -64) significantly decreased in women with inadequate GWG compared to those with recommended GWG, while SGA aOR 5.44 (1.36, 21.77) and prematurity aOR 3.55 (1.23, 10.21) increased. CONCLUSIONS: Low nutritional status and inadequate GWG remain a cause for concern in these women. The higher odds of macrosomia with increasing maternal BMI and higher odds of prematurity and small for gestational age infants with inadequate weight gain also require attention. Research and practice recommendations: Urgent attention is required by researchers, policy makers and decision-makers to facilitate development of culturally sensitive interventions to enhance nutritional status and health of mothers and babies, in an area known for its high incidence of maternal and neonatal mortality.

A retrospective comparative study of antenatal healthy lifestyle service interventions for women with a raised body mass index.

BACKGROUND: Women with obesity are more likely to gain excessive gestational weight; with both obesity and excessive weight gain linked to adverse outcomes for mothers and their infant. Provision of antenatal healthy lifestyle services is currently variable, with uncertainty over the most effective gestational healthy lifestyle interventions. AIM: To compare pregnancy and birth outcomes among women who experienced an antenatal health lifestyle service with a cohort who did not receive this service. METHODS: A retrospective comparative cohort study was undertaken in women with a BMI ≥ 40 kg/m² attending maternity care in two NHS Trusts. One Trust provided an antenatal healthy lifestyle service, while the comparison Trust provided routine maternity care. Data was collected from medical records. FINDINGS: No differences were observed between the antenatal healthy lifestyle service and comparison cohorts for average gestational weight gain [adjusted mean difference (aMD) - 0.70 kg (95%CI -2.33, 0.93)], rate of weight gain [aMD - 0.02 kg/week (95%CI -0.08, 0.04)] or weight gain in accordance with recommendations. The proportion of women breastfeeding at discharge was higher for the antenatal healthy lifestyle service than the comparison cohort (42.4% vs 29.8%). No other clinical outcomes were enhanced with the antenatal healthy lifestyle service. CONCLUSION: Internal audit had suggested the antenatal healthy lifestyle service was successful at managing gestational weight gain in women with a BMI ≥ 40 kg/m². However, no benefit on gestational weight gain was evident once the service was evaluated against a comparison cohort with adequate adjustment for confounders. It is essential that future services are evaluated against a relevant comparison group.

Differing intensities of a midwife-led antenatal healthy lifestyle service on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Maternal obesity and excessive gestational weight gain are associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. There is uncertainty over the most effective antenatal healthy lifestyle service, with little research determining the impact of different lifestyle intervention intensities on pregnancy outcomes. METHOD: This retrospective cohort study compared pregnancy and birth outcomes in women with a body mass index of 40 or above who were offered a low intensity midwife-led antenatal healthy lifestyle service (one visit) with women who were offered an enhanced service (three visits). The primary outcome was gestational weight gain. RESULTS: There were no differences between the two healthy lifestyle service intensities (N = 682) in the primary outcome of mean gestational weight gain [adjusted mean difference (aMD) -1.1 kg (95 % CI -2.3 to 0.1)]. Women offered the enhanced service had lower odds of gaining weight in excess of Institute of Medicine recommendations [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.63 (95 % CI 0.40-0.98)] with this reduction mainly evident in multiparous women. Multiparous women also gained less weight per week [aMD -0.06 kg/week (95 % CI -0.11 to -0.01)]. No overall beneficial effects were seen in maternal or neonatal outcomes measured such as birth weight [aMD 25 g (95 % CI -71 to 121)], vaginal birth [aOR 0.87 (95 % CI 0.64-1.19)] or gestational diabetes mellitus [aOR 1.42 (95 % CI 0.93-2.17)]. However, multiparous women receiving the enhanced service had reduced odds of small for gestational age [aOR 0.52 (95 % CI 0.31-0.87)]. This study was however underpowered to detect differences in some outcomes with low incidences. DISCUSSION: Uncertainty remains over the best management of women with severe obesity regarding effective interventions in terms of intensity. It is suggested that further research needs to consider the different classes of obesity separately and have a particular focus on the needs of nulliparous women given the lack of effectiveness of this service among these women.

"Everything is revolved around me being heavy it's always, always spoken about." Qualitative experiences of weight management during pregnancy in women with a BMI of 40kg/m2 or above.

INTRODUCTION: Maternal weight management services have been recognised as a good opportunity to influence lifestyle and dietary behaviour of mothers and families. Exploring women's views of maternal weight management services is paramount to understand what constitutes the most suitable service. This study therefore explored experiences among women with a raised body mass index (BMI) of maternal weight management service provision and the barriers and facilitators to weight management during pregnancy. METHOD: Thirteen women with a BMI≥40kg/m² undertook semi-structured interviews around weight management experiences during pregnancy. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Four themes emerged. 1). "Understanding where I am at" showed current readiness and motivation of women varied, from being avoidant to being motivated to make changes. 2). "Getting information" revealed inconsistent information provision during pregnancy. Women particularly wanted practical advice. Some attempted to find this for themselves from friends or the internet, however this left some women feeling confused when different sources provided inconsistent advice. 3). "Difficulties I face" identified physical, emotional and financial barriers and the strategies some women used to overcome these. 4). "Encountering professionals-a mixed experience" demonstrated women wanted to be treated with respect and sensitivity and that how weight management information was addressed was more important than who provided it. The fine line professionals tread was demonstrated by women thinking that they had received inadequate information and yet too much focus was placed on their weight and the associated risks during pregnancy without practical solutions to their weight management challenges. DISCUSSION: Women were empowered when practical advice was provided, not just the continual repetition of the risks of being obese during pregnancy. Antenatal weight management services need to be clear, sensitive and respectful. Services centred on individual women's needs and on their current and previous experiences are required. The psychological and social contexts of weight management also need to be addressed.