Cargando…

O.5.2-1 Return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators

PURPOSE: To investigate barriers to and facilitators of returning to running after childbirth, to inform the design of a return to running intervention. METHODS: The study adopted a mixed-methods design, using an e-survey for data collection with 503 postpartum runners (age: 34.8 ± 3.8 years) within...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: James, Megan, Crone, Diane, Evans, Lynne, Stiles, Victoria, Moore, Isabel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10494037/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckad133.242
_version_ 1785104602081787904
author James, Megan
Crone, Diane
Evans, Lynne
Stiles, Victoria
Moore, Isabel
author_facet James, Megan
Crone, Diane
Evans, Lynne
Stiles, Victoria
Moore, Isabel
author_sort James, Megan
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To investigate barriers to and facilitators of returning to running after childbirth, to inform the design of a return to running intervention. METHODS: The study adopted a mixed-methods design, using an e-survey for data collection with 503 postpartum runners (age: 34.8 ± 3.8 years) within 24 months after childbirth. The e-survey comprised closed- (quantitative) and open-ended (qualitative) questions. The closed-ended questions related to demographics, birth details, physical activity and running behaviour. The open-ended questions focussed on respondents’ experiences and opinions on the barriers and facilitators that ‘helped’, ‘hindered’ or ‘would have helped’ them to return to running. Quantitative data were presented as medians with interquartile ranges (IQR) and proportions. Free text responses to the open-ended questions were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: On completion of the e-survey, participants were a median time of 10 months post-birth (IQR: 5-16). Of the cohort, 81% had returned to running (n = 405), with a median time of 12 weeks (IQR: 8-16) to first post-birth run. However, only just over a third of those who had returned to running had returned to at least their pre-pregnancy level (n = 146). Prominent themes for what ‘helped’, ‘hindered’ and ‘would have helped’ mothers return to running included psychological factors, physical factors that affected recovery, presence or absence of advice, degrees of childcare, time and access to running, as well as availability of training programmes and social support. CONCLUSIONS: The key barriers to and facilitators of returning to running after childbirth were psychological, physical, and social in nature, with a number of possible interactions between them. The findings suggest the need for the development of an interdisciplinary intervention to address these factors holistically to support postpartum women in returning to running. Future research, utilising more in-depth methods such as interviews or focus groups, should be undertaken to increase understanding of some of these barriers and facilitators further. In particular, exploration of the possible interactions between these factors would allow for the design of an intervention that is appropriate to these relationships. SUPPORT/FUNDING SOURCE: Funded PhD studentiship from the Economic and Social Research Council.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10494037
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104940372023-09-12 O.5.2-1 Return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators James, Megan Crone, Diane Evans, Lynne Stiles, Victoria Moore, Isabel Eur J Public Health Parallel sessions PURPOSE: To investigate barriers to and facilitators of returning to running after childbirth, to inform the design of a return to running intervention. METHODS: The study adopted a mixed-methods design, using an e-survey for data collection with 503 postpartum runners (age: 34.8 ± 3.8 years) within 24 months after childbirth. The e-survey comprised closed- (quantitative) and open-ended (qualitative) questions. The closed-ended questions related to demographics, birth details, physical activity and running behaviour. The open-ended questions focussed on respondents’ experiences and opinions on the barriers and facilitators that ‘helped’, ‘hindered’ or ‘would have helped’ them to return to running. Quantitative data were presented as medians with interquartile ranges (IQR) and proportions. Free text responses to the open-ended questions were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: On completion of the e-survey, participants were a median time of 10 months post-birth (IQR: 5-16). Of the cohort, 81% had returned to running (n = 405), with a median time of 12 weeks (IQR: 8-16) to first post-birth run. However, only just over a third of those who had returned to running had returned to at least their pre-pregnancy level (n = 146). Prominent themes for what ‘helped’, ‘hindered’ and ‘would have helped’ mothers return to running included psychological factors, physical factors that affected recovery, presence or absence of advice, degrees of childcare, time and access to running, as well as availability of training programmes and social support. CONCLUSIONS: The key barriers to and facilitators of returning to running after childbirth were psychological, physical, and social in nature, with a number of possible interactions between them. The findings suggest the need for the development of an interdisciplinary intervention to address these factors holistically to support postpartum women in returning to running. Future research, utilising more in-depth methods such as interviews or focus groups, should be undertaken to increase understanding of some of these barriers and facilitators further. In particular, exploration of the possible interactions between these factors would allow for the design of an intervention that is appropriate to these relationships. SUPPORT/FUNDING SOURCE: Funded PhD studentiship from the Economic and Social Research Council. Oxford University Press 2023-09-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10494037/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckad133.242 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Parallel sessions
James, Megan
Crone, Diane
Evans, Lynne
Stiles, Victoria
Moore, Isabel
O.5.2-1 Return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators
title O.5.2-1 Return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators
title_full O.5.2-1 Return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators
title_fullStr O.5.2-1 Return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators
title_full_unstemmed O.5.2-1 Return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators
title_short O.5.2-1 Return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators
title_sort o.5.2-1 return to running after childbirth: barriers and facilitators
topic Parallel sessions
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10494037/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckad133.242
work_keys_str_mv AT jamesmegan o521returntorunningafterchildbirthbarriersandfacilitators
AT cronediane o521returntorunningafterchildbirthbarriersandfacilitators
AT evanslynne o521returntorunningafterchildbirthbarriersandfacilitators
AT stilesvictoria o521returntorunningafterchildbirthbarriersandfacilitators
AT mooreisabel o521returntorunningafterchildbirthbarriersandfacilitators