4.6 Article

Physical Activity Level of Urban Pregnant Women in Tianjin, China: A Cross-Sectional Study

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109624

关键词

-

资金

  1. Scientific Research Program of the Health Department of Tianjin, China [2013KZ085]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine the physical activity level and factors influencing physical activity among pregnant urban Chinese women. Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study enrolled 1056 pregnant women (18-44 years of age) in Tianjin, China. Their socio-demographic characteristics were recorded, and the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire was used to assess their physical activity during pregnancy. The data were analyzed by multinomial logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders. Results: Median total energy expenditure of pregnant women in each of the three trimesters ranged from 18.50 to 21.90 metabolic equivalents of task (METs) h/day. They expended 1.76-1.85 MET h/day on moderate and vigorous activities and 0.11 MET h/day on exercise. Only 117 of the women (11.1%) met the international guideline for physical activity in pregnancy (>= 150 min moderate intensity exercise per week). The most frequent reason given for not being more physically active was the fear of miscarriage. Higher education level (OR: 4.11, 95% CI: 1.59-10.62), habitual exercise before pregnancy (OR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.39-3.28), and husbands who exercised regularly (OR: 2.21, 95% CI: 1.33-3.67) significantly increased the odds of meeting the guideline (p<0.001). A low pre gravid body mass index (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.87) significantly decreased the odds (p<0.001). Conclusions: Few urban Chinese pregnant women met the recommended physical activity guideline. They also expended little energy exercising. Future interventions should be based on the clinic environment and targeting family members as well as the subjects. All pregnant women should be targeted, not just those in high-risk groups.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据