Evaluation of the CORE-10 to assess psychological distress in pregnancy

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Perinatal Mood, Anxiety, and Related Disorders: Guide de pratique 2024 du Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments pour le traitement des troubles de l'humeur, des troubles anxieux et des troubles connexes périnatals

BackgroundThe Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) publishes clinical practice guidelines for mood and anxiety disorders. This CANMAT guideline aims to provide comprehensive clinical guidance for the pregnancy and postpartum (perinatal) management of mood, anxiety and related disorders.MethodsCANMAT convened a core editorial group of interdisciplinary academic clinicians and persons with lived experience (PWLE), and 3 advisory panels of PWLE and perinatal health and perinatal mental health clinicians. We searched for systematic reviews of prevention and treatment interventions for perinatal depressive, bipolar, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive and post-traumatic stress disorders (January 2013-October 2023). We prioritized evidence from reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), except for the perinatal safety of medications where reviews of large high-quality observational studies were prioritized due to the absence of RCT data. Targeted searches for individual studies were conducted when systematic reviews were limited or absent. Recommendations were organized by lines of treatment based on CANMAT-defined levels of evidence quality, supplemented by editorial group consensus to balance efficacy, safety, tolerability and feasibility considerations.ResultsThe guideline covers 10 clinical sections in a question-and-answer format that maps onto the patient care journey: case identification; organization and delivery of care; non-pharmacological (lifestyle, psychosocial, psychological), pharmacological, neuromodulation and complementary and alternative medicine interventions; high-risk clinical situations; and mental health of the father or co-parent. Equity, diversity and inclusion considerations are provided.ConclusionsThis guideline's detailed evidence-based recommendations provide clinicians with key information to promote the delivery of effective and safe perinatal mental healthcare. It is hoped that the guideline will serve as a valuable tool for clinicians in Canada and around the world to help optimize clinical outcomes in the area of perinatal mental health.

The Road to Recovery: A Two-Year Longitudinal Analysis of Mental Health Among University Students During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic

Longitudinal research into the impact of COVID-19 on university students' mental health beyond the pandemic is lacking. This study aims to address the gap in the literature by tracking the mental health of university students over a two-year period, spanning the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath. A two-year longitudinal study surveyed a sample of university students (n = 302) three times between May 2020 and May 2022. Students' psychological distress, generalised anxiety, flourishing, and personal wellbeing were assessed at each time point. It was found that students' psychological distress levels spiked in May 2021 (T1) during the first year of the pandemic but reverted back to similar levels seen in May 2020 (T0) at the two-year follow-up (T2). While generalised anxiety gradually improved, both students' psychological distress and generalised anxiety remained considerably worse than pre-pandemic norms obtained in other studies. Students' flourishing scores remained very low, while their life satisfaction and state happiness improved slightly between May 2021 (T1) and May 2022 (T2). These findings clearly demonstrate that students' mental health is still in crisis, even after the COVID-19 pandemic. More needs to be done to support students beyond the pandemic generally, including this particularly unique cohort of students who endured unprecedented challenges for prolonged periods, and who are now transitioning into the working world. Practical implications and recommendations are discussed.

Evaluation of perinatal anxiety assessment measures: a cognitive interview study

BACKGROUND

Anxiety in pregnancy and postpartum is highly prevalent but under-recognised. To identify perinatal anxiety, assessment tools must be acceptable, relevant, and easy to use for women in the perinatal period.

METHODS

To determine the acceptability and ease of use of anxiety measures to pregnant or postpartum women (n = 41) we examined five versions of four measures: the Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD) 2-item and 7-item versions; Whooley questions; Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10); and Stirling Antenatal Anxiety Scale (SAAS). Cognitive interviews were used to examine ease of comprehension, judgement, retrieval and responding.

RESULTS

All measures were acceptable. Some items were deemed less relevant to the perinatal period e.g., difficulties sleeping. Ease of comprehension, judgement, retrieval and responding varied, with all measures having strengths and weaknesses. The SAAS and CORE-10 had the lowest mean number of problematic components. The GAD had the highest mean number of problematic components​. Non-binary response options were preferred. Preferences for time frames (e.g. one week, one month) varied. Qualitative data provides in-depth information on responses to each measure.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings can be used to inform clinical guidelines and research on acceptable anxiety assessment in pregnancy and after birth.

The influence of antenatal imaging on prenatal bonding in uncomplicated pregnancies: a mixed methods analysis

BACKGROUND

Prenatal bonding describes the emotional connection expectant parents form to their unborn child. Research acknowledges the association between antenatal imaging and enhanced bonding, but the influencing factors are not well understood, particularly for fathers or when using advanced techniques like fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This study aimed to identify variables which may predict increased bonding after imaging.

METHODS

First-time expectant parents (mothers = 58, fathers = 18) completed a two-part questionnaire (QualtricsXM™) about their expectations and experiences of ultrasound (n = 64) or fetal MRI (n = 12) scans in uncomplicated pregnancies. A modified version of the Prenatal Attachment Inventory (PAI) was used to measure bonding. Qualitative data were collected through open-ended questions. Multivariate linear regression models were used to identify significant parent and imaging predictors for bonding. Qualitative content analysis of free-text responses was conducted to further understand the predictors' influences.

RESULTS

Bonding scores were significantly increased after imaging for mothers and fathers (p < 0.05). MRI-parents reported significantly higher bonding than ultrasound-parents (p = 0.02). In the first regression model of parent factors (adjusted R2 = 0.17, F = 2.88, p < 0.01), employment status (β = -0.38, p < 0.05) was a significant predictor for bonding post-imaging. The second model of imaging factors (adjusted R2 = 0.19, F = 3.85, p < 0.01) showed imaging modality (β = -0.53), imaging experience (β = 0.42) and parental excitement after the scan (β = 0.29) were significantly (p < 0.05) associated with increased bonding. Seventeen coded themes were generated from the qualitative content analysis, describing how scans offered reassurance about fetal wellbeing and the opportunity to connect with the baby through quality interactions with imaging professionals. A positive scan experience helped parents to feel excited about parenthood. Fetal MRI was considered a superior modality to ultrasound.

CONCLUSIONS

Antenatal imaging provides reassurance of fetal development which affirms parents' emotional investment in the pregnancy and supports the growing connection. Imaging professionals are uniquely positioned to provide parent-centred experiences which may enhance parental excitement and facilitate bonding.

Assessment of perinatal anxiety: diagnostic accuracy of five measures

BACKGROUND

Anxiety in pregnancy and after giving birth (the perinatal period) is highly prevalent but under-recognised. Robust methods of assessing perinatal anxiety are essential for services to identify and treat women appropriately.

AIMS

To determine which assessment measures are most psychometrically robust and effective at identifying women with perinatal anxiety (primary objective) and depression (secondary objective).

METHOD

We conducted a prospective longitudinal cohort study of 2243 women who completed five measures of anxiety and depression (Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD) two- and seven-item versions; Whooley questions; Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10); and Stirling Antenatal Anxiety Scale (SAAS)) during pregnancy (15 weeks, 22 weeks and 31 weeks) and after birth (6 weeks). To assess diagnostic accuracy a sample of 403 participants completed modules of the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI).

RESULTS

The best diagnostic accuracy for anxiety was shown by the CORE-10 and SAAS. The best diagnostic accuracy for depression was shown by the CORE-10, SAAS and Whooley questions, although the SAAS had lower specificity. The same cut-off scores for each measure were optimal for identifying anxiety or depression (SAAS ≥9; CORE-10 ≥9; Whooley ≥1). All measures were psychometrically robust, with good internal consistency, convergent validity and unidimensional factor structure.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified robust and effective methods of assessing perinatal anxiety and depression. We recommend using the CORE-10 or SAAS to assess perinatal anxiety and the CORE-10 or Whooley questions to assess depression. The GAD-2 and GAD-7 did not perform as well as other measures and optimal cut-offs were lower than currently recommended.

When is the best time to screen for perinatal anxiety? A longitudinal cohort study

BACKGROUND

For screening for anxiety during pregnancy and after birth to be efficient and effective it is important to know the optimal time to screen in order to identify women who might benefit from treatment.

AIMS

To determine the optimal time to screen for perinatal anxiety to identify women with anxiety disorders and those who want treatment. A secondary aim was to examine the stability and course of perinatal anxiety over time.

METHODS

Prospective longitudinal cohort study of 2243 women who completed five screening questionnaires of anxiety and mental health symptoms in early pregnancy (11 weeks), mid-pregnancy (23 weeks), late pregnancy (32 weeks) and postnatally (8 weeks). Anxiety and mental health questionnaires were the GAD7, GAD2, SAAS, CORE-10 and Whooley questions. To establish presence of anxiety disorders diagnostic interviews were conducted with a subsample of 403 participants.

RESULTS

Early pregnancy was the optimal time to screen for anxiety to identify women with anxiety disorders and women wanting treatment at any time during pregnancy or postnatally. These findings were consistent across all five questionnaires of anxiety and mental health. Receiving treatment for perinatal mental health problems was most strongly associated with late pregnancy and/or postnatal assessments. Anxiety symptoms were highest in early pregnancy and decreased over time.

CONCLUSION

Findings show that screening in early pregnancy is optimal for identifying women who have, or develop, anxiety disorders and who want treatment. This has clear implications for practice and policy for anxiety screening during the perinatal period.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK parent experiences of pregnancy ultrasound scans and parent-fetal bonding: A mixed methods analysis

INTRODUCTION

Companionship in antenatal care is important for facilitating positive parental experiences. During the COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions on partner attendance at fetal ultrasound scans were introduced nationally to minimise transmission of the virus. This study aimed to explore the effect of these restrictions on maternal and paternal experiences of pregnancy scans and evaluate their potential effect on parent-fetal bonding.

METHODS

A UK-wide, anonymous cross-sectional survey was completed by new and expectant parents (n = 714) who had, or were awaiting a pregnancy scan during the COVID-19 pandemic. The CORE-10 and an adapted version of the Prenatal Attachment Inventory were used to evaluate psychological distress and prenatal bonding. Additional survey questions captured parental experiences of scans. Separate statistical and thematic analyses of the data were undertaken. A joint display matrix was used to facilitate integration of quantitative and qualitative claims to generate a comprehensive interpretation of study findings.

FINDINGS

When fathers did not attend the scan, feelings of excitement and satisfaction were significantly reduced (p<0.001) and feelings of anxiety increased (p<0.001) in both parents. Mothers were concerned about receiving unexpected news alone and fathers felt excluded from the scan. Mean paternal bonding (38.22, SD 10.73) was significantly lower compared to mothers (47.01, SD 7.67) although no difference was demonstrated between those who had attended the scan and those who had not. CORE-10 scores suggested low-to-mild levels of psychological distress, although the mean difference between mothers and fathers was not significant. Key themes described both parents' sense of loss for their desired pregnancy scan experience and reflected on sonographers' central role in providing parent-centred care during scans.

CONCLUSION

Restrictions on partner attendance at scans during the COVID-19 pandemic had a negative effect on parental experiences of antenatal imaging. Provision of parent-centred care, which is inclusive of partners, is essential for improved parental experiences.

A qualitative analysis of feelings and experiences associated with perinatal distress during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Rates of perinatal mental health difficulties (experienced during pregnancy and the 12-months postpartum) increased worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the UK, anxiety and depression were estimated to affect more than half of perinatal women during the first national lockdown. However, little is known about women’s qualitative experiences of distress. This study aimed to extend published quantitative findings resulting from the same data set (Harrison et al., Women Birth xxxx, 2021;  Harrison et al., J Reprod Infant Psychol 1–16, 2021) to qualitatively explore: 1) the feelings and symptoms associated with maternal perinatal distress during the COVID-19 pandemic; and 2) the associated sources of distress.

Methods

As part of an online survey during May 2020, 424 perinatal women responded to an open-ended question regarding a recent experience of distress. Qualitative data were analysed using an initial content analysis, followed by an inductive thematic analysis adopting a realist approach. Data were explored in the context of self-reported perinatal anxiety and depression symptoms.

Results

Initial content analysis of the data identified twelve distinct categories depicting participants’ feelings and symptoms associated with psychological distress. Despite the high rates of probable depression in the sample, women’s descriptions were more indicative of anxiety and general distress, than of symptoms traditionally related to depression. In terms of the associated psychosocial stressors, a thematic analysis identified five themes: Family wellbeing; Lack of support; Mothering challenges; Loss of control due to COVID-19; and Work and finances. Unsurprisingly given the context, isolation was a common challenge. Additionally, psychological conflict between maternal expectations and the reality of pregnancy and motherhood, loss of autonomy and control, and fears surrounding family health, safety, and wellbeing underlay many of the themes.

Conclusions

This study presents an array of feelings and symptoms expressed by perinatal mothers which may be useful to consider in relation to perinatal wellbeing. Furthermore, our data highlights several common sources of distress, including multiple COVID-19 specific factors. However, many were related to more general perinatal/maternal experiences. Our findings also point to considerations that may be useful in alleviating distress in pregnancy and early motherhood, including social support, realistic perinatal/maternal expectations, and support for those with perceived perinatal trauma.

Prevalence of anxiety and post-traumatic stress (PTS) among the parents of babies admitted to neonatal units: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Parents of babies admitted to neonatal units (NNU) are exposed to a range of potentially distressing experiences, which can lead to mental health symptoms such as increased anxiety and post-traumatic stress (PTS). This review aimed to describe how anxiety and PTS are defined and assessed, and to estimate anxiety and PTS prevalence among parents of babies admitted to NNU.

METHOD

Medline, Embase, PsychoINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health literature were searched to identify studies published prior to April 14, 2021. Included studies were assessed using Hoy risk of bias tool. A random-effects model was used to estimate pooled prevalence with 95% CIs. Potential sources of variation were investigated using subgroup analyses and meta-regression. The review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020162935).

FINDINGS

Fifty six studies involving 6,036 parents met the review criteria; 21 studies assessed anxiety, 35 assessed PTS, and 8 assessed both. The pooled prevalence of anxiety was 41.9% (95%CI:30.9, 53.0) and the pooled prevalence of PTS was 39.9% (95%CI:30.8, 48.9) among parents up to one month after the birth. Anxiety prevalence decreased to 26.3% (95%CI:10.1, 42.5) and PTS prevalence to 24.5% (95%CI:17.4, 31.6) between one month and one year after birth. More than one year after birth PTS prevalence remained high 27.1% (95%CI:20.7, 33.6). Data on anxiety at this time point were limited. There was high heterogeneity between studies and some evidence from subgroup and meta-regression analyses that study characteristics contributed to the variation in prevalence estimates.

INTERPRETATION

The prevalence of anxiety and PTS was high among parents of babies admitted to NNU. The rates declined over time, although they remained higher than population prevalence estimates for women in the perinatal period. Implementing routine screening would enable early diagnosis and effective intervention.

FUNDING

This research is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Policy Research Programme, conducted through the Policy Research Unit in Maternal and Neonatal Health and Care, PR-PRU-1217-21202. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Women's interpretation, understanding and attribution of the anhedonia question in the PHQ-4 and modified-Whooley questions in the antenatal period

OBJECTIVES

To report on the rates of misinterpretation, confusion, and attribution of the anhedonia question in the PHQ-4 and Whooley questions by pregnant women.

BACKGROUND

The NICE Perinatal Mental Health guidelines recommend the use of the anhedonia question for depression screening, yet evidence suggests it may be misinterpreted or not be related to mood.

METHOD

Women attending a public hospital's antenatal clinic, communicating in English as their language of choice, completed either the PHQ-4 or the Whooley questions. Following comments to general evaluation questions in the first sample, women were asked a targeted anhedonia interpretation question, an anhedonia attribution question, and an ease of understanding question (PHQ-4: N = 37-119; Whooley: N = 31-100).

RESULTS

Across the PHQ-4 and Whooley formats around 15% of participants completely misinterpreted the anhedonia question, with a further 17% finding it difficult to understand. Around two-thirds of those experiencing the symptom said it was due to normal symptoms of pregnancy, and not related to their mood. In the PHQ-4 format, which included all three questions, 48% of the women had one or more of these issues. While CALD women appear to have greater difficulty understanding the question, there were no meaningful associations with whether English was spoken at home.

CONCLUSION

Almost half of the women incorrectly interpreted the anhedonia question, or said that it was confusing, or that it did not reflect low mood. These data indicate that the anhedonia question should not be used in screening women in the antenatal period, whether in the PHQ-4 or Whooley formats.