Parents want information to support their parenting. These results have implications for planning and implementation of future parenting information and support programs and services.
Purpose
To determine the role of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and sedentary behavior in flow-mediated dilation (FMD) and glucose metabolism during late pregnancy.
Methods
Seventy normotensive, euglycemic pregnant women (31.6 ± 2.9 yr) in their third trimester (28–39 wk) were recruited. After a fasted blood sample; FMD was measured (brachial artery Doppler ultrasonography, normalized for the shear stimulus [area under the curve]). Anterograde and retrograde shear rate were estimated. Physical activity (MVPA) and sedentary behavior were assessed via accelerometry for seven consecutive days (Actigraph wGT3X-BT). We categorized the women as active (>150 min·wk−1) or inactive (<150 min·wk−1) according to their accelerometry data. Data were corrected for age and gestational age.
Results
On average, women were sedentary 67.1% ± 8.2% of their waking hours. Active pregnant women (>150 min·wk−1 MVPA, n = 32) engaged in 266.7 ± 99.3 min·wk−1 MVPA, whereas inactive pregnant women (<150 min·wk−1 MVPA, n = 38) engaged in 76.1 ± 42.5 min·wk−1 MVPA. The FMD response (normalized to the magnitude of shear stress stimulus) was greater in active compared with inactive pregnant women (6.5 ± 4.4 a.u. vs 3.9 ± 3.5 a.u.; F = 4.619; P = 0.005). The MVPA in active pregnant women was inversely correlated with insulin concentrations (r = −0.556; P = 0.03). In inactive pregnant women, higher amounts of sedentary behavior were associated with lower amounts of retrograde shear rate (r = 0.504; P = 0.02), retrograde blood flow (r = 0.499; P = 0.02), and retrograde velocity (r = 0.508; P = 0.02) during baseline, but not correlated with the FMD response.
Conclusions
Engaging in MVPA during pregnancy is associated with improved FMD and a lower insulin concentration. Sedentary behavior was not associated with FMD responses.
Setting
In Alberta, a small team of specialized public health experts typically complete case investigation and contact tracing. High COVID-19 case counts and a shortage of trained public health professionals required a rapid and significant adaptation of staffing models to meet the population’s needs.
Intervention
A tiered, interdisciplinary staffing model, based on those in critical care, was developed, piloted, and implemented in the Alberta Health Services’ Communicable Disease Control department in late 2020 to complete case investigation and contact tracing. The final model included novice, non-regulated professionals divided into pods of four to six investigators, led by an experienced regulated investigator. Team leads oversaw five pods. Communicable disease nurses provided an additional tier of clinical expertise. During the model development, roles and responsibilities of team members were delineated, ratios for supervision were tested, and rapid training was provided.
Outcomes
The tiered staffing model began in November 2020 with staff members in two pods. At its peak in early May 2021, 72 pods of 502 non-regulated members, 134 regulated investigators, and 4 communicable disease nurses completed 780–973 case investigations daily, or 40–45% of all positive cases in Alberta. In comparison, the same number of regulated investigators working independently in the traditional staffing model without non-regulated pods completed, on average, 249 case investigations daily.
Implications
A tiered staffing model can be effective at maximizing the skills of the experienced members of the case investigation team to maintain case investigation and contact tracing activities during a pandemic.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.