Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Latent profile analysis of pregnant exercise adherence and the relationship with demographic and socio-psychological factors: a multicentre cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy physical activity (PA) and exercise benefits both mothers and babies, but requires sustained adherence. Many pregnant women fail to meet recommended levels. The reasons for low adherence comprised fluctuating physiological and environmental factors. This study aims to identify discrete profiles of pregnant women based on exercise adherence and to examine differences in demographic and socio-psychological factors across these profiles. METHODS: A survey was conducted among 1,255 pregnant women in three hospitals in Shenzhen, Dongguan, and Shunde, China, using the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS), the Pregnancy Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale (P-ESES), and the Pregnancy Physical Activity Social Support Scale (P-PASSS). In the analysis, EARS items were scored higher, indicating a healthier state (e.g., sufficient time and energy). Latent profile analysis (LPA) was employed to classify adherence profiles, and multinomial logistic regression was used to examine differences in demographic, self-efficacy, and social support across four groups. RESULTS: Four profiles of exercise adherence were identified: (1) Profile 1 (16.97%), characterized by deficits in time and energy, (2) Profile 2 (15.22%), a group with sufficient time resources but the lowest self-efficacy, (3) Profile 3 (43.98%), characterized by high adherence despite moderate barriers, and (4) Profile 4 (23.83%), a group with optimal exercise adherence, confidence, and resources. Women with higher P-ESES (OR: 1.14-1.38) and P-PASSS (OR: 1.04-1.06) scores were more likely to be in Profiles 3 and 4. Additionally, women's partners who never or occasionally exercise were significantly more likely to be categorized into Profile 1 (OR = 0.18 for Profile 4 vs. Profile 1). Furthermore, the first trimester emerged as a significant risk period for lower exercise adherence, whereas overweight/obesity was independently associated with higher odds of membership in Profile 4. CONCLUSION: The study identified four distinct profiles of exercise adherence among pregnant women. 32.19% of participants were in the two lower exercise-adherence groups. Pregnant women in Profile 1 were characterized by challenges related to a lack of time and knowledge. Participants in Profile 2 showed the lowest exercise self-efficacy and social support among the four profiles. Furthermore, women in early pregnancy were more likely to have lower adherence profiles. Hence, targeted interventions addressing these specific groups are warranted to improve exercise adherence during pregnancy.

Humans

Positive psychology interventions during pregnancy: A systematic review.

Positive psychology interventions (PPI) have been applied and demonstrated evidence in various population groups. The present systematic review focused on the types and influence of PPI on the physical and psychological health of pregnant women. Studies that matched the selection criteria were identified on EBSCOhost, PsychINFO, Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus and four positive psychology journals. From the 2528 records identified, finally eight studies were included in the review. PPI in this review were delivered utilising various positive psychology components such as hope, gratitude and optimism based on existing theories, for example, the strengths theory, broaden-and-build theory, and hope theory. Most interventions were conducted from 14 gestational weeks onwards and were delivered via virtual platforms or mobile applications. As a result of this systematic review, it was identified that PPIs for maternal well-being were aimed at improving (1) physical health, including labour pain, nausea and vomiting; (2) psychological health, including stress, emotions, anxiety and depression; and (3) subjective health, including life satisfaction, perceived social support and quality of life. Most of the selected studies provided significant evidence towards improvement of well-being outcomes from administering PPI. For future studies, in-depth PPI integrated coping and support approaches should be further evidenced among diverse pregnant populations.

Humans