Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Multidisciplinary, biopsychosocial factors contributing to return to running and running related stress urinary incontinence in postpartum women
  1. Isabel S Moore1,
  2. Megan L James1,
  3. Emma Brockwell2,3,
  4. Joanna Perkins4,
  5. Alex L Jones5,
  6. Gráinne M Donnelly3,6,7
  1. 1Cardiff School of Sport and Health Sciences, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, UK
  2. 2Private practice, Oxted, UK
  3. 3Perinatal Physical Activity Research Group, Canterbury Christchurch University, Canterbury, UK
  4. 4Private practice, Mumma Physio, Cardiff, UK
  5. 5Department of Psychology, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
  6. 6Private practice, ABSOLUTE.PHYSIO, Maguiresbridge, UK
  7. 7University of Ulster, Coleraine, Londonderry, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Isabel S Moore, Cardiff School of Sport and Health Sciences, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff CF5 2YB, UK; imoore{at}cardiffmet.ac.uk

Abstract

Objectives To examine contributory factors behind postpartum return-to-running and return to pre-pregnancy running level, in addition to risk factors for postpartum running-related stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

Methods 881 postpartum women completed an online questionnaire. Clinically and empirically derived questions were created relating to running experiences and multidisciplinary, biopsychosocial contributory factors. Logistic regression was used to determine predictors for return-to-running, returning to pre-pregnancy level of running and running-related SUI.

Results Median time to first postpartum run was 12 weeks. Running during pregnancy (OR: 2.81 (1.90 to 4.15)), a high weekly running volume (OR: 1.79 (1.22 to 2.63)), lower fear of movement (OR: 0.53 (0.43 to 0.64)) and not suffering vaginal heaviness (OR: 0.52 (0.35–0.76)) increased the odds of return-to-running. Factors that increased the odds of returning to pre-pregnancy running level were a low weekly running volume (OR: 0.38 (0.26 to 0.56)), having more than one child (OR: 2.09 (1.43 to 3.05)), lower fear of movement (OR: 0.78 (0.65 to 0.94)), being younger (OR: 0.79 (0.65 to 0.96)) and shorter time to running after childbirth (OR: 0.74 (0.60 to 0.90)). Risk factors for running-related SUI were having returned to running (OR: 2.70 (1.51 to 4.76)) and suffering running-related SUI pre-pregnancy (OR: 4.01 (2.05 to 7.82)) and during pregnancy (OR: 4.49 (2.86 to 7.06)); having a caesarean delivery decreased the odds (OR: 0.39 (0.23 to 0.65)).

Conclusion Running during pregnancy may assist women safely return-to-running postpartum. Fear of movement, the sensation of vaginal heaviness and running-related SUI before or during pregnancy should be addressed early by healthcare providers.

  • female
  • pregnancy
  • risk factor
  • urinary Incontinence
  • stress
  • running

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. Deidentified participant data coded for analysis are available from the author ISM (imoore@cardiffmet.ac.uk). Data are available for further analysis based on the agreement of all coauthors.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. Deidentified participant data coded for analysis are available from the author ISM (imoore@cardiffmet.ac.uk). Data are available for further analysis based on the agreement of all coauthors.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @IzzyMoorePhD, @meganljames16, @emma_physiomum, @mummaphysio, @alexjonesPhD, @ABSPhysio

  • Correction notice This article has been corrected since it published Online First. The author affiliations have been corrected.

  • Contributors ISM, EB and GMD conceived the study idea. ISM, MLJ, EB, JP and GMD designed the study. ISM, MLJ, EB, JP and GMD disseminated the survey. ISM, MLJ and ALJ analysed and interpreted the data. ISM, MLJ and GMD prepared the first draft of the manuscript. ISM, MLJ, EB, JP, ALJ and GMD all made substantial contributions to the revision of the manuscript prior to submission.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests ISM is an Associate Editor for the British Journal of Sports Medicine.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.