Prevett · British journal of sports medicine 2025 · Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized studies · n=50 studies (47,619 participants)

Resistance training in pregnancy: systematic review and meta-analysis of pregnancy, delivery, fetal and pelvic floor outcomes and call to action.

Cited 11 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis composed predominantly of randomized controlled trials (45 of 50 included studies).

PubMed 40610191 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2024-109123 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

Authors searched six databases through March 15, 2024, for studies examining resistance training (RT) alone or within multicomponent exercise programmes in pregnant individuals compared to usual care or non-RT controls. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool. Evaluated outcomes included pregnancy outcomes (gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, perinatal mood disorders), delivery outcomes (caesarean section, perineal tearing, instrumented delivery, length of labour), fetal outcomes (birth mass, microsomia, macrosomia, gestational age), and pelvic floor disorder rates.

What was found

Across 50 included studies (45 randomized controlled trials, 3 non-randomized interventions, 2 observational studies; 47,619 participants), RT interventions were associated with significant reductions in: - Gestational hypertension: OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.66; I² = 0%) - Gestational diabetes: OR 0.62 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.79; I² = 0%) - Perinatal mood disorders: OR 0.48 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.73; I² = 0%) - Macrosomia: OR 0.67 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.88; I² = 23%) Quantitative results were not reported in the abstract for pre-eclampsia, delivery outcomes, pelvic floor disorders, birth mass, microsomia, or gestational age.

Why it matters

This review demonstrates that resistance training in pregnancy is associated with meaningful risk reductions for major hypertensive, metabolic, and mood-related maternal conditions as well as macrosomia.

Limits

Ninety percent of the included studies evaluated RT only as part of multicomponent programmes (often alongside aerobic training), confounding the isolated effect of resistance exercise. The RT interventions generally used low-to-moderate dosages with poor reporting of load prescription and progression. Only 16 of 50 studies were at low risk of bias (27 moderate, 7 high risk).

Cited by