Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

mHealth Physical Activity Intervention: A Randomized Pilot Study in Physically Inactive Pregnant Women

  • Published:
Maternal and Child Health Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction Physical inactivity is prevalent in pregnant women, and innovative strategies to promote physical activity are strongly needed. The purpose of the study was to test a 12-week mobile health (mHealth) physical activity intervention for feasibility and potential efficacy. Methods Participants were recruited between December 2012 and February 2014 using diverse recruitment methods. Thirty pregnant women between 10 and 20 weeks of gestation were randomized to an intervention (mobile phone app plus Fitbit) or a control (Fitbit) group. Both conditions targeted gradual increases in physical activity. The mHealth intervention included daily messages and a mobile phone activity diary with automated feedback and self-monitoring systems. Results On monthly average, 4 women were screened for initial eligibility by telephone and 2.5 were randomized. Intervention participants had a 1096 ± 1898 step increase in daily steps compared to an increase of 259 ± 1604 steps in control participants at 12 weeks. The change between groups in weekly mean steps per day during the 12-week study period was not statistically significant (p = 0.38). The intervention group reported lower perceived barrier to being active, lack of energy, than the control group at 12-week visit (p = 0.02). The rates of responding to daily messages and using the daily diary through the mobile app declined during the 12 week study period. Discussion It was difficult to recruit and randomize inactive women who wanted to increase physical activity during pregnancy. Pregnant women who were motivated to increase physical activity might find using mobile technologies in assessing and promoting PA acceptable. Possible reasons for the non-significant treatment effect of the mHealth intervention on physical activity are discussed. Public awareness of safety and benefits of physical activity during pregnancy should be promoted. Clinicaltrials.Gov Identifier NCT01461707.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee (2008). Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, 2008. Washington (DC): United States Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS).

  2. Evenson, K. R., Savitz, D. A., & Huston, S. L. (2004). Leisure-time physical activity among pregnancy women in the US. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 18, 400–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. ACOG. (2002). Exercise during pregnancy and the postpartum period. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 267. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 99, 171–173.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Davies, G., Wolfe, L., Mottola, M., et al. (2003). Joint SOGC/CSEP clinical practice guideline: Exercise in pregnancy and the postpartum period. Canadian Journal of Applied Physiology, 28, 330–341.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. (2006). Impact of physical activity during pregnancy and postpartum on chronic disease risk. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 38 (5), 989–1006.

  6. Mudd, L. M., Owe, K. M., Mottola, M. F., et al. (2013). Health benefits of physical activity during pregnancy: An international perspective. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 45(2), 268–277.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pearce, E. E., Evenson, K. R., Downs, D. S., et al. (2013). Strategies to promote physical activity during pregnancy. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 7(1), 38–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Noah, J. A., Spierer, D. K., Gu, J., Bronner, S., et al. (2013). Comparison of steps and energy expenditure assessment in adults of Fitbit Tracker and Ultra to the Actical and indirect calorimetry. Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology, 37, 456–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Weiss, B., Mays, M. Z., Martz, W., et al. (2005). Quick assessment of literacy in primary care: The newest vistal sign. The Annals of Family Medicine, 3(6), 514–522.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. ACOG Committee Obstetric Practice. (2002). ACOG Committee opinion. Number 267, January 2002: Exercise during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 99, 171–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., Hardy, A. B., et al. (1980). Tests of generality of self-efficacy theory. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4, 39–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. USDHHS. Stay Active and Be Fit! A guide to fitness and activity fundamentals. www.presidentschallenge.org/pdf/getfit.pdf.

  13. Institute of Medicine. (2009). Weight gain during pregnancy: Reexamining the guidelines. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Taylor-Piliae, R. E., Norton, L. C., Haskell, W. L., et al. (2006). Validation of a new brief physical activity survey among men and women aged 60–69 years. American Journal of Epidemiology, 164(6), 598–606.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Marcus, B. H., & Forsyth, L. (2009). Motivating people to be physically active (2nd ed.). IL: Human Kinetics, Urbana-Champaign.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Craig, C. L., Tudor-Locke, C., Cragg, S., et al. (2010). Process and treatment of pedometer data collection for youth: The Canadian physical activity levels among youth study. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 42(3), 430–435.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mutrie, N., Doolin, O., Fitzsimons, C. F., et al. (2012). Increasing older adults’ walking through primary care: Results of a pilot randomized controlled trial. Family Practice, 29(6), 633–642. doi:10.1093/fampra/cms038.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Marcus, B. H., Selby, V. C., Niaura, R. S., et al. (1992). Self-efficacy and the stages of exercise behavior change. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63(1), 60–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sallis, J. F., Grossman, R. M., Pinski, R. B., et al. (1987). The development of scales to measure social support for diet and exercise behaviors. Preventive Medicine, 16(6), 825–836.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Barrier to being active. www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/physical/life/barriers_quiz.pdf.

  21. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Wallace, A. M., Boyer, D. B., Dan, A., et al. (1986). Aerobic exercise, maternal self-esteem, and physical discomforts during pregnancy. Journal of Nurse Midwifery, 31(6), 255–262.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Harris, P. A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., et al. (2009). Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 42(2), 377–381.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Evenson, K. R., Savitz, D. A., & Huston, S. L. (2004). Leisure-time physical activity among pregnant women in the US. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 18, 400–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fukuoka, Y., Vittinghoff, E., Jong, S. S., et al. (2010). Innovation to motivation-Pilot study of a mobile phone intervention to increase physical activity among sedentary women. Preventive Medicine, 51, 287–289.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Fukuoka, Y., Gay, C. L., Joiner, K. L., et al. (2015). A novel diabetes prevention intervention using a mobile app: A randomized controlled trial with overweight adults at risk. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 49(2), 223–237.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Evenson, K. R., Moos, M. K., Carrier, K., et al. (2008). Perceived barriers to physical activity among pregnant women. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 13(3), 364–375.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Symons-Downs, D., & Hausenblas, H. A. (2004). Women’s exercise beliefs and behaviors during their pregnancy and postpartum. Journal of Midwifery and Womens Health, 49(2), 138–144.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fox, K. R. (1999). The influence of physical activity on mental well-being. Public Health Nutrition, 2(Supplement 3a), 411–418.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Fjeldsoe, B. S., Miller, Y. D., & Marshall, A. L. (2010). MobileMums: A randomized controlled trial of an SMS-based physical activity intervention. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 39, 101–111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fjeldsoe, B. S., Miller, Y. D., & Graves, N. (2015). Randomized controlled trial of an improved version of MobileMums, an intervention for increasing physical activity in women with young children. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 5(4), e007226. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007226.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, Blood Institution (3R01HL104147-02S1) from the National Institutes of Health (NIH); the National Institutes of Health (NIH), through UCSF-CTSI Grant Number UL1 RR024131. The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. We also thank Victoria Phan, BS, Joelle Takahashi, BA, Stephen Weinstein, MD, Joanne Vogel, MD, and the MoTHER Study participants.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Health and Aging/Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California St., Suite 340, San Francisco, CA, 94118, USA

    JiWon Choi

  2. Department of Biobehavioral Sciences, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Ji hyeon Lee

  3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Eric Vittinghoff

  4. Department of Physiological Nursing/Institute for Health & Aging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Yoshimi Fukuoka

Authors
  1. JiWon Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ji hyeon Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eric Vittinghoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yoshimi Fukuoka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to JiWon Choi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 217 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Choi, J., Lee, J.h., Vittinghoff, E. et al. mHealth Physical Activity Intervention: A Randomized Pilot Study in Physically Inactive Pregnant Women. Matern Child Health J 20, 1091–1101 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-015-1895-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-015-1895-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation