Next Article in Journal
SuperPATH—Current Status of Evidence and Further Investigations: A Scoping Review and Quality Assessment
Previous Article in Journal
Prognostic Impact of Modified H2FPEF Score in Patients Receiving Trans-Catheter Aortic Valve Replacement
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

The Influence of Physical Activity during Pregnancy on Miscarriage—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

by
Rubén Barakat
1,
Dingfeng Zhang
1,
Cristina Silva-José
1,
Miguel Sánchez-Polán
1,
Evelia Franco
2,* and
Michelle F. Mottola
3
1
AFIPE Research Group, Faculty of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences-INEF, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
2
Department of Education, Research and Evaluation Methods, Faculty of Social and Human Sciences, Universidad Pontificia de Comillas, 28049 Madrid, Spain
3
R. Samuel McLaughlin Foundation-Exercise and Pregnancy Lab, 2245, 3-M Centre, School of Kinesiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Anatomy & Cell Biology, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Children’s Health Research Institute, The University of Wester Ontario, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12(16), 5393; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165393
Submission received: 14 July 2023 / Revised: 11 August 2023 / Accepted: 17 August 2023 / Published: 19 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Obstetrics & Gynecology)

Abstract

:
Miscarriage is an inability to complete the normal process of pregnancy and childbirth and represents a major concern for pregnant women that can be an emotionally devastating event. While it has been suggested that engaging in strenuous physical activity might be associated with an elevated risk of miscarriage, there is a recent systematic review that suggested that prenatal exercise is not associated with fetal mortality. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis (SR + MA) was to assess the effects of physical activity during pregnancy on the likelihood of experiencing a miscarriage (Registration No.: CRD42022370629). Thirteen randomized clinical trials (3728 pregnant women) were included. Meta-analyses were conducted with the dependent variable being the miscarriage ratio in each study. The total risk ratio (RR) sum was calculated using a random effects model. The I2 statistic was utilized to quantify the heterogeneity observed in the results. No significant association between exercise during pregnancy and the occurrence of miscarriage was found (RR = 0.83 95% CI = 0.83 (0.49–1.41); z = 0.69, p = 0.49; I2 = 0.00%, Heterogeneity p = 0.91). Results of the present SR + MA showed no increase in miscarriage risk in those who engaged in low- to moderate-intensity exercise compared to those who did not.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Miscarriage is an inability to complete the normal process of pregnancy and childbirth and represents a major concern for pregnant women that can be an emotionally devastating event [1]. The effects of engaging in physical activity on miscarriage risks, especially in the first trimester, have been a historical concern for both pregnant individuals and their physicians. While it has been suggested that engaging in strenuous physical activity might be associated with an elevated risk of miscarriage [2], there is a recent systematic review that suggested that prenatal exercise is not associated with fetal mortality [3]. Previous studies have also evidenced that the association between physical activity and miscarriage risks might be null [4], or, that physical activity might be a protective factor against miscarriages [5,6].
One of the barriers to physical activity is the fear of miscarriage, which may delay pregnant individuals from starting or continuing an exercise program throughout pregnancy, especially in the first trimester [7]. Since only 15% of the population is meeting current international guidelines of 150 min of physical activity per week [8], it is important that scientific evidence be reviewed to assist in alleviating these fears in order to encourage physical activity throughout pregnancy. The benefits of physical activity are numerous to both the pregnant individual and the developing fetus [9]. Nevertheless, there remains a paucity of scientific knowledge regarding the association between gestational physical activity and the risk of miscarriage. Considering that miscarriage risk is a matter of concern during pregnancy, there is a need to gain an understanding of the effects of physical activity on miscarriage risk. Consequently, a thorough review of experimental studies investigating the impact of physical activity during pregnancy on the occurrence of miscarriage is greatly warranted.
The main objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effects of physical activity during pregnancy on the likelihood of experiencing a miscarriage.

2. Materials and Methods

The current study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, Registration No. CRD42022370629). The population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) framework was employed to analyze the search sources [10].

2.1. Population

The population included pregnant individuals without any relative obstetric contraindications (e.g., gestational hypertension, malnutrition, or moderate cardiovascular disease) or absolute contraindications (e.g., premature labor, preeclampsia, or incompetent cervix) who participated in a prenatal physical activity program.

2.2. Intervention

Analyzed characteristics of the intervention were as follows: (a) weekly frequency of physical activity sessions; (b) intensity, where all studies included utilized a moderate load intensity, defined as 55–65% of the maximum maternal heart rate or the perceived effort on the Borg Scale (range 12–14); (c) duration of the physical activity program; (d) type of physical activity, including yoga, Pilates, aerobic exercises, strength training, or pelvic floor training; (e) supervision of the physical activity program; (f) duration of the individual sessions, as presented in Table 1.

2.3. Comparison

Women who participated in an exercise or physical activity program during pregnancy were compared with those who did not. Intervention characteristics were collected and compared, as presented in Table 1.

2.4. Outcomes

The occurrence of miscarriage served as the primary (target) outcome of interest.

2.5. Study Design and Selection Process

The literature search was conducted between September and November 2022 at Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (INEF), using the following databases: EBSCO, including Academic Search Premier, Education Resources Information Center, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and OpenDissertations; Clinicaltrials.gov; Web of Science; Scopus; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). The search encompassed articles written in English or Spanish and published between 1 January 2010 and 30 November 2022.
The search terms used were:
English: (physical activity or exercise or physical exercise or fitness or strength training or physical intervention or cointerventions) AND (pregnancy or pregnant or maternal or antenatal) AND (randomized clinical trial or RCT) AND (miscarriage).
Spanish: (actividad física OR ejercicio OR ejercicio físico OR fitness OR entrenamiento OR intervención física OR co-intervención AND embarazo OR embarazada OR maternal OR prenatal AND ensayo clínico aleatorizado AND aborto.
Regarding inclusion criteria, the eligible articles for review comprised studies that measured physical activity or exercise intervention (excluding articles that solely provided advice for an active pregnancy or those that included a measurable physical activity questionnaire but lacked an exercise intervention). The outcome of interest was miscarriage, and the characteristics of the physical activity or exercise program were also considered. This process is illustrated in Figure 1. Two reviewers (RB and CS) independently screened titles and abstracts of all identified citations and potentially eligible articles were selected. Full-text articles were independently assessed by the two reviewers for eligibility criteria. Any discrepancies were resolved by consensus.
Additionally, secondary outcomes such as physiological, sociodemographic, and delivery outcomes were examined by two reviewers (DZ and MS) to evaluate the effects of each intervention on maternal health. However, these secondary outcomes were not included in the meta-analyses. From each selected study, we extracted the following information: author(s), publication year, country where the study was conducted, study design type, number of participants, characteristics of the intervention program, and the variables analyzed (both primary and secondary outcomes).

2.6. Statistical Analysis, Quality of Evidence Assessment, and Risk of Bias

Meta-analyses were conducted with the dependent variable being the miscarriage ratio in each study, categorized as either miscarriage “yes” or “no”. The number of events observed in each study group and their respective relative risks (RR) were recorded. The total RR sum was calculated using a random effects model [11]. Each study was assigned a weight based on its sample size, contributing to the overall analysis and establishing a weighted average. The I2 statistic was utilized to quantify the heterogeneity observed in the results due to variations in interventions and study designs, indicating the extent of variability in the effects of each intervention, which were non-random.
The following criteria were employed to classify heterogeneity levels: low heterogeneity (25%), moderate heterogeneity (50%), and high heterogeneity (75%) [5,12]. In cases of high heterogeneity, one possible approach is to subgroup the studies based on different characteristics that may explain this variability. However, considering the limited results of our study, we deemed it more appropriate to include all articles in each analysis, thus providing a comprehensive.
Analyses were performed using Review Manager (RevMan computer program, 5.4 version).
The quality of evidence for the primary outcome and each individual study was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework, with RCT studies rated as moderate or high quality [13]. To evaluate the potential risk of bias (including selection, performance, attrition, detection, and reporting bias), the Cochrane Handbook guidelines were followed [14]. Randomized clinical trials were initially considered to have a “low” risk of bias due to their study design and intervention, in comparison to non-randomized interventions. However, their risk of bias could be either increased or decreased depending on the presence of “high” or “low” scores across the different bias sources. Non-RCTs were rated lower due to study design and were rated as very low, low, or moderate [13].
Table 1. Characteristics of the studies included in the review.
Table 1. Characteristics of the studies included in the review.
AuthorYearCountryTypeNEGCGIntervention, Physical Exercise ProgramMain Variables AnalyzedSecondary Variables Analyzed
FreqIntensityDuration of ProgramType of ExerciseSuperv ClassDuration of ClassAdh.
Brik [15]2019SpainRCT1207545355–60% Max HR29 wAerobic, strength, coordination and balance, and pelvic floor exercisesYes60 min70%Gestational weight gain, miscarriageType of delivery, birth weight, gestational age
Daly [16]2017IrelandRCT8844443Mod26 wAerobic, resistance, pelvic floor exercisesYes50–60 min-Maternal fasting plasma glucose, gestational weight gainType of delivery
and, birth weight, miscarriage
Petrov Fieril [17]2014SwedenRCT9251412Mod12 wResistance trainingYes60 min-Health-related quality of life, physical strengthBirth weight, gestational age, miscarriage
Garnaes [4]2017NorwayRCT9146455Mod24 wEndurance and strength training. Pelvic floor muscle exercises every dayYes (3)
No (2)
60 min
50 min
50%Birth weight, gestational age miscarriageType of delivery
Guelfi [18]2016AustraliaRCT17285873Mod14 wHome-based stationary cycling programYes20–60 min-Gestational diabetes, miscarriageType of delivery, birth weight
Kluge [19]2011South AfricaRCT5026247Low–Mod10 wFive instruction exercise class + transverse abdominal and pelvic floor muscles training.No30 min-Pain intensity and functional abilityType of delivery, birth weight, duration of labor, miscarriage
Navas [20]2021SpainRCT294148146355–65% Max HR20 wAquatic exerciseYes45 min-Postpartum depression, quality of life, and quality of sleepMiscarriage, gestational age, and birth weight
Pelaez [6]2019SpainRCT345115230365–70% Max HR24 wAerobic and resistance trainingYes60–65 min80%Gestational weight gain, macrosomia, type of deliveryMiscarriage
Renault [21]2014DenmarkRCT2831421417Low24 wDaily
11,000 steps, hypocaloric
low-fat diet
No60 + min-Gestational weight gain, miscarriageGestational age
Sagedal [22]2017NorwayRCT5912962952Mod24 wAerobic, strength training. Dietary counsellingYes60 min-Gestational weight gain, birth weightGestational age, perineal tear, miscarriage
Ussher [23]2015UKRCT7893943952–3Mod6 wTreadmill exerciseYes20 + min-Continuous smoking abstinence, miscarriageType of delivery, birth weight
Vinter [5]2011DenmarkRCT3601801807Mod25 wAerobic and light strength training, + dietary counselingYes (1)
No (6)
60 min
30–60 m
77%Gestational weight gain, gestational diabetesType of delivery, birth weight, macrosomia, miscarriage
Wang [24]2017ChinaRCT3001501503Mod24 wStationary cycling programYes45–60 min-Gestational diabetes, gestational weight gainBirth weight, miscarriage
Author: first author last name, Year: year of study, Country: country where the article has been developed (usually in the method part), Type: randomized clinical (or controlled) trial. N: total number of women analyzed. EG: number of women analyzed in the intervention group. CG: Number of women analyzed in the control group. Freq: weekly frequency of exercise sessions. Intensity: moderate, high, low. Duration of program: weeks of duration. Type of exercise: aerobic, muscle strengthening, etc. Superv. Classes: whether or not there was supervision. Duration of class: minutes of each session. Adh.: adherence.

3. Results

3.1. Study Selection

A total of 67 articles were initially retrieved during the first stage of the search, and 8 were removed before screening: duplicate records removed (n = 2) and other reasons such as no pregnant population or lack of basic information (n = 6). Nineteen articles were then excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Subsequently, 27 articles were excluded for the following reasons: being a narrative review (n = 10), lacking a description of the intervention protocol (n = 12), or not providing information regarding miscarriage (n = 5). Ultimately, 13 RCT studies were included for further meta-analysis (Figure 1).
Regarding the type of intervention reported in the included studies (Table 1), the majority of them described physical activity sessions conducted by professionals in the respective field. These interventions encompassed various activities such as aerobic exercise, strength exercises, and aquatic activities, among others. The sessions outlined in the reviewed studies were designed to achieve moderate intensity and were conducted with a frequency ranging from one to seven days per week, lasting between 20 and 65 min per session. The duration of each intervention ranged from 2 to 24 weeks.

3.2. Effect of Physical Activity on the Occurrence of Miscarriage

A total of thirteen distinct RCTs were included in the present analysis, examining the incidence of miscarriage among women in both the experimental and control groups. The findings demonstrated no significant association between exercise practice during pregnancy and the occurrence of miscarriage (risk ratio = 0.83 95% CI = 0.83 (0.49–1.41); z = 0.69, p = 0.49; I2 = 0.00%, heterogeneity p = 0.91). Figure 2 illustrates the forest plot corresponding to the meta-analysis conducted.

3.3. Risk of Bias Assessment

Overall, there was moderate quality evidence from 13 RCTs (n = 3728). The risk of bias in each article was rated as low, unclear, or high potential risk (Figure 3). The quality of evidence was downgraded due to selection bias [5,21] and performance bias [5,19]. Selection bias in this type of study mainly reflects the fact that randomization might have been compromised. Performance bias may be due to the fact that blinding participants is practically impossible in a controlled trial consisting of engaging in a physical activity program. More than half of the studies included in the review were rated as showing an unclear attrition bias, given the risk that participants who dropped out could have differed from those who remained in the study regarding factors associated with miscarriages. However, most of the studies were categorized as showing a low potential risk of bias.

4. Discussion

One of the barriers to being active during pregnancy is fear of harm to the baby and miscarriage [25,26]. The current study showed that exercise practice during pregnancy did not increase the risk of miscarriage with moderate quality evidence from 13 RCTs and 3728 women. We agree with the findings of a previous systematic review that examined the literature up to 6 January 2017 [3]. Our updated search including RCTs over the last 5 years confirms that pregnant individuals with no contraindications to exercise can exercise safely throughout pregnancy without fear of miscarriage, as there is no difference in miscarriage risk between those who exercise and those who do not.
Although we accepted all papers that listed miscarriage in the title or abstract, definitions of miscarriage varied between the 13 RCTs. A recent systematic review that examined specific first trimester risks of miscarriage (<14 weeks gestation) and exercise reported sparse and diverging results with only five studies and suggested that this was due to the wide heterogeneity of study design and exercise assessments between studies and the method of recall (either retrospectively after miscarriage or prospectively) [27].
Defining miscarriage precisely is a challenging task, primarily due to variations in the gestational period during which this complication can occur (measured in weeks of pregnancy) and the diverse and intricate approaches to the concept of miscarriage. The World Health Organization [28], as cited in a recent study on recurrent miscarriages [29], defines miscarriage as the expulsion or loss of a fetus at any point from conception to the 24th week of gestation. With this definition in mind, we found no risk to those who exercised prior to this time point.
The exercise intensity summarized in the current study ranges from low to moderate, with a mixture of exercise modalities, including walking, aquatics, aerobic activities, and resistance training, with 11 out of the 13 studies offering supervised exercise classes. The evidence would suggest that low- to moderate-intensity exercise does not increase the risk of miscarriage, however, studies regarding high-intensity exercise are limited. In individuals with in vitro fertilization who exercised more than 4 h per week, there was double the risk of miscarriage [30]. In addition, a large Danish study that assessed prenatal exercise in 90,000 women before and after having a miscarriage found a higher risk in those with a higher exercise volume of over 7 h per week [31]. However, when the authors only included those who were interviewed prospectively through a secondary analysis, the association was no longer significant [32]. More recently, when 34 international Norwegian athletes were examined and compared to active controls who engaged in greater than 150 min of exercise per week, there was no difference in miscarriage rates [33]. This was confirmed by Wowdzia et al. [34] in their systematic review and meta-analysis of elite athletes and pregnancy outcomes, where they concluded that there were no increased rates of miscarriage, although the quality of evidence was rated as “very low” due to inconsistency and risk of bias [34]. L’Heveder et al. [35] in their narrative review of pregnancy outcomes in elite sportswomen would concur that there is limited evidence; nevertheless, the existing data do not support an increase in adverse outcomes with increasing intensity. This would suggest that more studies are needed to evaluate the risk in those who exercise above the current pregnancy guidelines and that exercising within the guidelines in those without contraindications is considered safe. Furthermore, a recent systematic review that revisited absolute and relative contraindications to being physically active would suggest that recurrent miscarriage should be removed as a contraindication [36], as there is no scientific evidence that would suggest that exercising within the guidelines increases the risk of miscarriage, and by removing this contraindication, there may also be a removal of fear of miscarriage as a barrier to engaging in activity throughout pregnancy.
As exercise does not appear to be a risk factor for miscarriage, several authors have suggested that other biological, behavioral, and lifestyle factors may determine the risk of miscarriage [32,37]. These risk factors are multi-dimensional, complex, and not entirely understood, and include increased maternal age, infertility, alcohol consumption, smoking, and caffeine intake, although they remain controversial and unconfirmed [37]. Of note that may also increase the risk of miscarriage are previous pregnancy termination, stress, change in partner, and low pre-pregnancy weight [37]. Other factors include obesity, daily lifting of >20 kg, and working nights [32]. Evidence would suggest that advice encouraging a healthy diet, reducing stress, and promoting emotional well-being may help reduce miscarriage risk in early pregnancy [37].
The strengths of the current study are the use of methodological rigor (GRADE) to establish standards, our inclusion of randomized controlled trials, and the use of articles in English and Spanish. The limitations include the variability of miscarriage definitions between authors and the difficulty in standardizing exercise intensity and volume between studies.

5. Conclusions

“Moderate” quality of evidence showed no increase in miscarriage risk in those who engage in low- to moderate-intensity exercise compared to those who do not. More prospective research is needed to fully investigate the risks of miscarriage in those engaging in exercise above the current pregnancy guidelines.

Funding

The APC was funded by Project UPM C2311580017. Instituto de las Mujeres. Ministerio de Igualdad de España.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Ane Uría-Minguito and Alejandro Barrera for their collaboration in the preparation of this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Galeotti, M.; Mitchell, G.; Tomlinson, M.; Aventin, Á. Factors affecting the emotional wellbeing of women and men who experience miscarriage in hospital settings: A scoping review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2022, 22, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. McDonald, A.; McDonald, J.; Armstrong, B.; Cherry, N.; Cote, R.; Lavoie, J.; Nolin, A.; Robert, D. Fetal death and work in pregnancy. J. Saf. Res. 1989, 20, 42–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Davenport, M.H.; Kathol, A.J.; Mottola, M.F.; Skow, R.J.; Meah, V.L.; Poitras, V.J.; Garcia, A.J.; Gray, C.E.; Barrowman, N.; Riske, L. Prenatal exercise is not associated with fetal mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br. J. Sports Med. 2019, 53, 108–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Garnaes, K.K.; Nyrnes, S.A.; Salvesen, K.Å.; Salvesen, Ø.; Mørkved, S.; Moholdt, T. Effect of supervised exercise training during pregnancy on neonatal and maternal outcomes among overweight and obese women. Secondary analyses of the ETIP trial: A randomised controlled trial. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0173937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Vinter, C.A.; Jensen, D.M.; Ovesen, P.; Beck-Nielsen, H.; Jørgensen, J.S. The LiP (Lifestyle in Pregnancy) study: A randomized controlled trial of lifestyle intervention in 360 obese pregnant women. Diabetes Care 2011, 34, 2502–2507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Pelaez, M.; Gonzalez-Cerron, S.; Montejo, R.; Barakat, R. Protective effect of exercise in pregnant women including those who exceed weight gain recommendations: A randomized controlled trial. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2019, 94, 1951–1959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Evenson, K.R.; Moos, M.-K.; Carrier, K.; Siega-Riz, A.M. Perceived barriers to physical activity among pregnant women. Matern. Child Health J. 2009, 13, 364–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Evenson, K.R.; Wen, F. Prevalence and correlates of objectively measured physical activity and sedentary behavior among US pregnant women. Prev. Med. 2011, 53, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Barakat, R.; Perales, M.; Garatachea, N.; Ruiz, J.R.; Lucia, A. Exercise during pregnancy. A narrative review asking: What do we know? Br. J. Sports Med. 2015, 49, 1377–1381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 2015, 4, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Higgins, J.P.; Thompson, S.G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat. Med. 2002, 21, 1539–1558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. González, I.F.; Urrútia, G.; Alonso-Coello, P. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: Scientific rationale and interpretation. Rev. Española Cardiol. (Engl. Ed.) 2011, 64, 688–696. [Google Scholar]
  13. Guyatt, G.H.; Oxman, A.D.; Vist, G.E.; Kunz, R.; Falck-Ytter, Y.; Alonso-Coello, P.; Schünemann, H.J. GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008, 336, 924–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Higgins, J.P.; Savović, J.; Page, M.J.; Elbers, R.G.; Sterne, J.A. Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. In Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 2019; pp. 205–228. [Google Scholar]
  15. Brik, M.; Fernández-Buhigas, I.; Martin-Arias, A.; Vargas-Terrones, M.; Barakat, R.; Santacruz, B. Does exercise during pregnancy impact on maternal weight gain and fetal cardiac function? A randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019, 53, 583–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Daly, N.; Farren, M.; McKeating, A.; O’Kelly, R.; Stapleton, M.; Turner, M.J. A Medically Supervised Pregnancy Exercise Intervention in Obese Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017, 130, 1001–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Petrov Fieril, K.; Glantz, A.; Fagevik Olsen, M. The efficacy of moderate-to-vigorous resistance exercise during pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2015, 94, 35–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Guelfi, K.J.; Ong, M.J.; Crisp, N.A.; Fournier, P.A.; Wallman, K.E.; Grove, J.R.; Doherty, D.A.; Newnham, J.P. Regular Exercise to Prevent the Recurrence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstet. Gynecol. 2016, 128, 819–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Kluge, J.; Hall, D.; Louw, Q.; Theron, G.; Grové, D. Specific exercises to treat pregnancy-related low back pain in a South African population. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2011, 113, 187–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Navas, A.; Carrascosa, M.d.C.; Artigues, C.; Ortas, S.; Portells, E.; Soler, A.; Yañez, A.M.; Bennasar-Veny, M.; Leiva, A. Effectiveness of moderate-intensity aerobic water exercise during pregnancy on quality of life and postpartum depression: A multi-center, randomized controlled trial. J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10, 2432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Renault, K.M.; Nørgaard, K.; Nilas, L.; Carlsen, E.M.; Cortes, D.; Pryds, O.; Secher, N.J. The Treatment of Obese Pregnant Women (TOP) study: A randomized controlled trial of the effect of physical activity intervention assessed by pedometer with or without dietary intervention in obese pregnant women. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014, 210, 134.e131–134.e139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Sagedal, L.; Øverby, N.; Bere, E.; Torstveit, M.; Lohne-Seiler, H.; Småstuen, M.; Hillesund, E.; Henriksen, T.; Vistad, I. Lifestyle intervention to limit gestational weight gain: The Norwegian Fit for Delivery randomised controlled trial. BJOG Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2017, 124, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Ussher, M.; Lewis, S.; Aveyard, P.; Manyonda, I.; West, R.; Lewis, B.; Marcus, B.; Riaz, M.; Taylor, A.H.; Barton, P.; et al. The London Exercise and Pregnant smokers (LEAP) trial: A randomised controlled trial of physical activity for smoking cessation in pregnancy with an economic evaluation. Health Technol. Assess 2015, 19, vii–xxiv, 1–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Wang, C.; Wei, Y.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, Q.; Sun, Y.; Su, S.; Zhang, L.; Liu, C.; Feng, Y.; et al. A randomized clinical trial of exercise during pregnancy to prevent gestational diabetes mellitus and improve pregnancy outcome in overweight and obese pregnant women. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017, 216, 340–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hegaard, H.K.; Kjaergaard, H.; Damm, P.P.; Petersson, K.; Dykes, A.-K. Experiences of physical activity during pregnancy in Danish nulliparous women with a physically active life before pregnancy. A qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2010, 10, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hanghøj, S. When it hurts I think: Now the baby dies. Risk perceptions of physical activity during pregnancy. Women Birth 2013, 26, 190–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hegaard, H.K.; Ersbøll, A.S.; Damm, P. Exercise in pregnancy: First trimester risks. Clin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2016, 59, 559–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. WHO. WHO: Recommended definitions, terminology and format for statistical tables related to the perinatal period and use of a new certificate for cause of perinatal deaths. Modifications recommended by FIGO as amended October 14, 1976. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 1977, 56, 247–253. [Google Scholar]
  29. Toth, B.; Bohlmann, M.; Hancke, K.; Kuon, R.; Nawroth, F.; von Otte, S.; Rogenhofer, N.; Rudnik-Schöneborn, S.; Schleußner, E.; Tempfer, C. Recurrent Miscarriage: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry No. 015/050, May 2022). Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2022, 83, 49–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Morris, S.N.; Missmer, S.A.; Cramer, D.W.; Powers, R.D.; McShane, P.M.; Hornstein, M.D. Effects of lifetime exercise on the outcome of in vitro fertilization. Obstet. Gynecol. 2006, 108, 938–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Madsen, M.; Jørgensen, T.; Jensen, M.; Juhl, M.; Olsen, J.; Andersen, P.; Nybo Andersen, A.M. Leisure time physical exercise during pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage: A study within the Danish National Birth Cohort. BJOG Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2007, 114, 1419–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Feodor Nilsson, S.; Andersen, P.; Strandberg-Larsen, K.; Nybo Andersen, A.M. Risk factors for miscarriage from a prevention perspective: A nationwide follow-up study. BJOG Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2014, 121, 1375–1385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Sundgot-Borgen, J.; Sundgot-Borgen, C.; Myklebust, G.; Sølvberg, N.; Torstveit, M.K. Elite athletes get pregnant, have healthy babies and return to sport early postpartum. BMJ Open Sport Exerc. Med. 2019, 5, e000652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Wowdzia, J.B.; McHugh, T.-L.; Thornton, J.; Sivak, A.; Mottola, M.F.; Davenport, M.H. Elite athletes and pregnancy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2021, 53, 534–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. L’Heveder, A.C.M.; Mitra, A.; Kasaven, L.; Saso, S.; Prior, T.; Pollock, N.; Dooley, M.; Joash, K.; Jones, B.P. Sports obstetrics: Implications of Pregnancy in Elite Sportswomen, a Narrative Review. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 4977–4993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Meah, V.L.; Davies, G.A.; Davenport, M.H. Why can’t I exercise during pregnancy? Time to revisit medical ‘absolute’ and ‘relative’ contraindications: Systematic review of evidence of harm and a call to action. Br. J. Sports Med. 2020, 54, 1395–1404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Maconochie, N.; Doyle, P.; Prior, S.; Simmons, R. Risk factors for first trimester miscarriage—Results from a UK-population-based case-control study. BJOG 2007, 114, 170–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the analyzed articles.
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the analyzed articles.
Jcm 12 05393 g001
Figure 2. Effect of physical activity during pregnancy on miscarriage incidence [4,5,6,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24].
Figure 2. Effect of physical activity during pregnancy on miscarriage incidence [4,5,6,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24].
Jcm 12 05393 g002
Figure 3. Risk of bias summary from the retrieved articles [4,5,6,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24].
Figure 3. Risk of bias summary from the retrieved articles [4,5,6,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24].
Jcm 12 05393 g003
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Barakat, R.; Zhang, D.; Silva-José, C.; Sánchez-Polán, M.; Franco, E.; Mottola, M.F. The Influence of Physical Activity during Pregnancy on Miscarriage—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 5393. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165393

AMA Style

Barakat R, Zhang D, Silva-José C, Sánchez-Polán M, Franco E, Mottola MF. The Influence of Physical Activity during Pregnancy on Miscarriage—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023; 12(16):5393. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165393

Chicago/Turabian Style

Barakat, Rubén, Dingfeng Zhang, Cristina Silva-José, Miguel Sánchez-Polán, Evelia Franco, and Michelle F. Mottola. 2023. "The Influence of Physical Activity during Pregnancy on Miscarriage—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" Journal of Clinical Medicine 12, no. 16: 5393. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165393

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop