Exercise during pregnancy protects against hypertension and macrosomia: randomized clinical trial
Abstract
Background The prevalence of all pregnancies with some form of hypertension can be up to 10%, with the rates of diagnosis varying according to the country and population studied and the criteria used to establish the diagnosis. Prepregnancy obesity and excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) of all body mass index (BMI) categories have been associated with maternal hypertensive disorders and linked to macrosomia (>4000 g) and low birthweight (<2500 g). No large randomized controlled trial with high adherence to an exercise program has examined pregnancy-induced hypertension and these associated issues. We investigated whether women adherent (≥80% attendance) to an exercise program initiated early showed a reduction in pregnancy-induced hypertension and excessive GWG in all prepregnancy BMI categories, and determined if maternal exercise protected against macrosomia and low birthweight. Objective We sought to examine the impact of a program of supervised exercise throughout pregnancy on the incidence of pregnancy-induced hypertension. Study design A randomized controlled trial was used. Women were randomized into an exercise group (N = 382) or a control group (N = 383) receiving standard care. The exercise group trained 3 d/wk (50-55 min/session) from gestational weeks 9-11 until weeks 38-39. The 85 training sessions involved aerobic exercise, muscular strength, and flexibility. Results High attendance to the exercise program regardless of BMI showed that pregnant women who did not exercise are 3 times more likely to develop hypertension (odds ratio [OR], 2.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-6.81, P = .01) and are 1.5 times more likely to gain excessive weight if they do not exercise (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.06-2.03, P = .02). Pregnant women who do not exercise are also 2.5 times more likely to give birth to a macrosomic infant (OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.03-6.20, P = .04). Conclusion Maternal exercise may be a preventative tool for hypertension and excessive GWG, and may control offspring size at birth while reducing comorbidities related to chronic disease risk.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
None of the included studies blinded participants, and all were considered high risk of bias for blinding of participants and personnel.
“Regarding blinding of participants and personnel, one study does not provide information [16] and none performed blinding of participants, considering all of them to be at high risk of bias.”
From A systematic review and meta-analysis of exercise-based intervention to prevent gestational diabetes in women with overweight or obesity (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
In five studies sequence concealment was low risk; in two it was unclear.
“Regarding the concealment of the sequence, in five studies sequence implementation was carried out by an independent person (low risk of bias) [16, 18, 19, 21, 22] and in two no information is presented [17, 20] (considered unclear risk because there was not enough information to allow an assessment of low risk or high risk).”
From A systematic review and meta-analysis of exercise-based intervention to prevent gestational diabetes in women with overweight or obesity (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
In three studies there was blinding of personnel analysing data (low risk); in the rest information was insufficient.
“In three studies [18, 19, 21] there was blinding of the personnel analysing the data (low risk of bias), and in the rest of them there was not enough information to allow an assessment of low risk or high risk [16, 17, 20, 22].”
From A systematic review and meta-analysis of exercise-based intervention to prevent gestational diabetes in women with overweight or obesity (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 41 · Cited by 275
- Authors
- Barakat, R., Pelaez, M., Cordero, Y., Perales, M., Lopez, C., Coteron, J., & Mottola, M. F.
- Affiliations
- Universidad Católica de Murcia (ES)
- Western University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Mottola, Michelle F.
- Venue
- American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-05
- Volume
- 214
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 649.e1-649.e8
- ISSN
- 0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2204351822
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 11
- FWCI
- 25.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
- Keywords
- exercise during pregnancy, gestational hypertension, macrosomia, excessive gestational weight gain, low birth weight, aerobic exercise, resistance training, flexibility training, exercise adherence, pre-pregnancy body mass index, maternal hypertensive disorders
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Birth Weight, Female, Fetal Macrosomia, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Pregnancy, Weight Gain, Exercise, Diabetes, Gestational, Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review