Exercise Beliefs and Barriers in Pregnancy (EBBP)

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Patterns of physical activity engagement during pregnancy: beliefs and barriers.

  • IRAS ID

    206537

  • Contact name

    Nadia Merdasi Caceres

  • Contact email

    um12nmc@leeds.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    University of Leeds

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 2 months, 13 days

  • Research summary

    Are there common perceived barriers or held beliefs regarding exercise during pregnancy for women in Leeds?

    This study aims to identify common ideas, concepts and preconceptions regarding taking exercise during pregnancy. This is a valuable area of research as it can identify information that it is important for health care professionals to relay to their pregnant patients, and allow resources to be focused on the areas or themes that arise most commonly.

    General good health and some physical activity in pregnancy has been shown to be beneficial in terms of the pregnancy itself, in terms of a safe delivery and has also been linked to the long-term health of the baby (foetal programming).

    With ever-increasing numbers of overweight, obese and diabetic individuals, and subsequently an increasing number of pregnant women with these conditions, this is becoming an even more prominent issue in current obstetric care.

    The aim is to recruit women (over 18 years of age) from antenatal clinics at Leeds General Infirmary and St James' University Hospital in Leeds, who would complete a questionnaire at a single point during their pregnancy (at approximately 20 weeks gestation). The questionnaire would include a mixture of basic demographic questions (e.g. age, occupation, number of previous pregnancies), health questions (e.g. smoking/drinking habits, pre-pregnancy weight and exercise patterns) and questions on exercise during pregnancy including any changes from before pregnancy alongside potential reasons for these changes.

    The questionnaires would be anonymised and would then be analysed for common themes/patterns.

  • REC name

    London - Stanmore Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    16/LO/2218

  • Date of REC Opinion

    3 Jan 2017

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion