Association of Antenatal Diet and Physical Activity-Based Interventions With Gestational Weight Gain and Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Helena J Teede, Cate Bailey, Lisa J Moran, Mahnaz Bahri Khomami, Joanne Enticott, Sanjeeva Ranasinha, Ewelina Rogozinska, Helen Skouteris, Jacqueline A Boyle, Shakila Thangaratinam, Cheryce L Harrison

Journal: JAMA internal medicine 2022;182(2):106-114

PMID: 34928300

Plain Language Summary

plain language summary logo

With an obesogenic environment, unhealthy lifestyle, and accelerating weight gain, obesity is now the most common medical condition in the world. Preconception and pregnancy are priority life stages for healthy lifestyles and obesity prevention with excess weight being associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, long-term noncommunicable disease in women, and epigenetic consequences across generations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of different types of diet and physical activity–based antenatal lifestyle interventions with gestational weight gain (GWG) and maternal and neonatal outcomes. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 28 studies together with 89 studies identified during a previous study. The included studies were randomised controlled trials (which involved 34 546 women) that examined diet (n = 14), physical activity (n = 53), diet with physical activity (n = 19), and mixed interventions (n = 31). Results show that compared with routine care, antenatal diet and physical activity–based lifestyle interventions were associated with reduced GWG. Lifestyle interventions were also associated with lower risk of gestational diabetes and total adverse maternal outcomes. Authors conclude by supporting the integration of structured diet and physical activity interventions alongside routine antenatal care, and the development of policies to improve the health of mothers and their offspring around the world.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) is common and associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Antenatal lifestyle interventions limit GWG; yet benefits of different intervention types and specific maternal and neonatal outcomes are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of different types of diet and physical activity-based antenatal lifestyle interventions with GWG and maternal and neonatal outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

A 2-stage systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Health Technology Assessment Database was conducted from February 1, 2017, to May 31, 2020. Search results from the present study were integrated with those from a previous systematic review from 1990 to February 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized trials reporting GWG and maternal and neonatal outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted for random-effects meta-analyses to calculate the summary effect estimates and 95% CIs.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Outcomes were clinically prioritized, with mean GWG as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, cesarean section, preterm delivery, large or small for gestational age neonates, neonatal intensive care unit admission, or fetal death.

RESULTS

A total of 117 randomized clinical trials of antenatal lifestyle interventions (involving 34 546 women) were included. Overall lifestyle intervention was associated with reduced GWG (-1.15 kg; 95% CI, -1.40 to -0.91), risk of gestational diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.89), and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.94) vs routine care. Compared with routine care, diet was associated with less GWG (-2.63 kg; 95% CI, -3.87 to -1.40) than physical activity (-1.04 kg; 95% CI, -1.33 to -0.74) or mixed interventions (eg, unstructured lifestyle support, written information with weight monitoring, or behavioral support alone) (-0.74 kg; 95% CI, -1.06 to -0.43). Diet was associated with reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.45-0.82), preterm delivery (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.84), large for gestational age neonate (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.08-0.47), neonatal intensive care admission (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.95), and total adverse maternal (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.92) and neonatal outcomes (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.72). Physical activity was associated with reduced GWG and reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.75), hypertensive disorders (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.90), cesarean section (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95), and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.71-0.86). Diet with physical activity was associated with reduced GWG (-1.35 kg; 95% CI, -1.95 to -0.75) and reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.96) and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95). Mixed interventions were associated with reduced GWG only.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This systematic review and meta-analysis found level 1 evidence that antenatal structured diet and physical activity-based lifestyle interventions were associated with reduced GWG and lower risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. The findings support the implementation of such interventions in routine antenatal care and policy around the world.

Address: Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Endocrinology and Diabetes Units, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Warwick Business School, Warwick University, Coventry, United Kingdom.; Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Endocrinology and Diabetes Units, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Meta-Analysis Group, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, United Kingdom.; Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Warwick Business School, Warwick University, Coventry, United Kingdom.; Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Monash Women's, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.; Birmingham Women's and Children's National Health Service Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.