Objective To evaluate the disability and functioning of women with low‐risk pregnancy in the second and third gestational trimesters. Methods A longitudinal observational study was conducted from June 5, 2015, to April 30, 2016, in Family Health Units in the city of Santa Cruz, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil, involving women who were in the second trimester of pregnancy where the pregnancy had been classified as low‐risk. A form was designed specifically for the study to collect sociodemographic, urogynecological, and obstetric data. Functioning and disability were assessed using WHODAS 2.0, and descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed. Results Higher levels of disability were observed in cognition in the second trimester (P=0.021), while mobility and life activities domains had higher scores (higher score meaning the woman was more adversely affected) in the third trimester (P=0.007 and P=0.029). Urinary incontinence in the second trimester affected functioning in participation (P=0.023). Pain affected life activities (P=0.023) in the second trimester and participation in the third trimester (P=0.044); and general functioning (P=0.050 and P=0.025), mobility (P=0.002 and P=0.001), and self‐care (P=0.0446 and P=0.023) in the second and third trimesters, respectively. Conclusion The findings showed that, even in a low‐risk pregnancy, functioning can be affected in different domains. The identification of impairments to functioning could enable improvement in care. Longitudinal studies involving the first trimester and postpartum are necessary to gain insight into women's disability and functioning during the pregnancy–puerperal period.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is a practical, generic and widely used tool to assess the functioning and disability in several settings and health conditions. Although the use of categorical variables is common, this choice to present data could separate persons with very close functioning profiles into different categories. PURPOSE: This study aims to compare different ways of expressing the WHODAS score and give elements for the researcher to understand and choose the most appropriate way to statistically analyse the WHODAS scores. METHODS: A methodological study with secondary data of one hundred ninety-five women. The WHODAS score was analysed in different ways and associated with sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle, and health aspects. The Poisson regression was chosen with the final WHODAS score in four variations (continuous, dichotomous, polytomous, and quartiles), and the presence of chronic disease. RESULTS: The analysis showed statistical significance in the univariate analysis for the adjustment variables and all the variations of the disability variable. The distribution analysis of the prevalence ratio and the AIC evidenced that the WHODAS score as a continuous variable had the lower AIC and statistical significance, as well as the most significant area under the ROC curve. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the use of the continuous variable is the most indicated and that the categorization of the WHODAS score should be avoided.