1
|
Dubreucq M, Dupont C, Lambregtse-Van den Berg MP, Bramer WM, Massoubre C, Dubreucq J. A systematic review of midwives' training needs in perinatal mental health and related interventions. Front Psychiatry 2024; 15:1345738. [PMID: 38711873 PMCID: PMC11071341 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1345738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2023] [Accepted: 04/02/2024] [Indexed: 05/08/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Midwives may be key stakeholders to improve perinatal mental healthcare (PMHC). Three systematic reviews considered midwives' educational needs in perinatal mental health (PMH) or related interventions with a focus on depression or anxiety. This systematic review aims to review: 1) midwives' educational/training needs in PMH; 2) the training programs in PMH and their effectiveness in improving PMHC. Methods We searched six electronic databases using a search strategy designed by a biomedical information specialist. Inclusion criteria were: (1) focus on midwives; (2) reporting on training needs in PMH, perinatal mental health problems or related conditions or training programs; (3) using quantitative, qualitative or mixed-methods design. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool for study quality. Results Of 4969 articles screened, 66 papers met eligibility criteria (47 on knowledge, skills or attitudes and 19 on training programs). Study quality was low to moderate in most studies. We found that midwives' understanding of their role in PMHC (e.g. finding meaning in opening discussions about PMH; perception that screening, referral and support is part of their routine clinical duties) is determinant. Training programs had positive effects on proximal outcomes (e.g. knowledge) and contrasted effects on distal outcomes (e.g. number of referrals). Conclusions This review generated novel insights to inform initial and continuous education curriculums on PMH (e.g. focus on midwives' understanding on their role in PMHC or content on person-centered care). Registration details The protocol is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021285926).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marine Dubreucq
- Centre referent de rehabilitation psychosociale, GCSMS REHACOOR 42, Saint-Étienne, France
- University Claude Bernard Lyon1, Research on Healthcare Performance (RESHAPE) INSERM U1290, Lyon, France
| | - Corinne Dupont
- University Claude Bernard Lyon1, Research on Healthcare Performance (RESHAPE) INSERM U1290, Lyon, France
- AURORE Perinatal Network, Hospices civiles de Lyon, Croix Rousse Hospital, Lyon, France
| | - Mijke P. Lambregtse-Van den Berg
- Departments of Psychiatry and Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Wichor M. Bramer
- Medical Library, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Catherine Massoubre
- University Hospital of Saint-Étienne & EA 7423 (Troubles du Comportement Alimentaire, Addictions et Poids Extrêmes (TAPE), Université Jean Monnet - Saint-Etienne), Saint-Etienne, France
| | - Julien Dubreucq
- University Hospital of Saint-Étienne, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, France & Marc Jeannerod Institute of Cognitive Sciences UMR 5229, CNRS & Claude Bernard University, Lyon, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dubreucq M, Thiollier M, Tebeka S, Fourneret P, Leboyer M, Viaux-Savelon S, Massoubre C, Dupont C, Dubreucq J. Toward recovery-oriented perinatal healthcare: A participatory qualitative exploration of persons with lived experience and health providers' views and experiences. Eur Psychiatry 2023; 66:e86. [PMID: 37860880 DOI: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.2464] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Perinatal mental health disorders (PMHD) remain often undetected, undiagnosed, and untreated with variable access to perinatal mental health care (PMHC). To guide the design of optimal PMHC (i.e., coproduced with persons with lived experience [PLEs]), this qualitative participatory study explored the experiences, views, and expectations of PLEs, obstetric providers (OP), childcare health providers (CHPs), and mental health providers (MHPs) on PMHC and the care of perinatal depression. METHODS We conducted nine focus groups and 24 individual interviews between December 2020 and May 2022 for a total number of 84 participants (24 PLEs; 30 OPs; 11 CHPs; and 19 MHPs). The PLEs group included women with serious mental illness (SMI) or autistic women who had contact with perinatal health services. We recruited PLEs through social media and a center for psychiatric rehabilitation, and health providers (HPs) through perinatal health networks. We used the inductive six-step process by Braun and Clarke for the thematic analysis. RESULTS We found some degree of difference in the identified priorities between PLEs (e.g., personal recovery, person-centered care) and HPs (e.g., common culture, communication between providers, and risk management). Personal recovery in PMHD corresponded to the CHIME framework, that is, connectedness, hope, identity, meaning, and empowerment. Recovery-supporting relations and peer support contributed to personal recovery. Other factors included changes in the socio-cultural conception of the peripartum, challenging stigma (e.g., integrating PMH into standard perinatal healthcare), and service integration. DISCUSSION This analysis generated novel insights into how to improve PMHC for all users including those with SMI or autism.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marine Dubreucq
- Centre Referent de Rehabilitation Psychosociale, GCSMS REHACOOR 42, Saint-Étienne, France
- INSERM U1290, Research on Healthcare Performance (RESHAPE), University Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | | | - Sarah Tebeka
- Université de Paris, INSERM UMR1266, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, Team 1, Paris, France
- Department of Psychiatry, AP-HP, Louis Mourier Hospital, Colombes, France
| | - Pierre Fourneret
- Department of Psychopathology of Child and Adolescent Development, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
- Marc Jeannerod Institute of Cognitive Sciences UMR 5229, CNRS & Claude Bernard University, Lyon, France
| | - Marion Leboyer
- Fondation Fondamental, Créteil, France
- Université Paris Est Créteil, INSERM U955, IMRB, Translational NeuroPsychiatry, Créteil, France
- AP-HP, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Département Médico-Universitaire de Psychiatrie et d'Addictologie (DMU IMPACT), Fédération Hospitalo-Universitaire de Médecine de Précision en Psychiatrie (FHU ADAPT), Créteil, France
| | - Sylvie Viaux-Savelon
- Marc Jeannerod Institute of Cognitive Sciences UMR 5229, CNRS & Claude Bernard University, Lyon, France
- Hôpital de la Croix-Rousse, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
| | - Catherine Massoubre
- University Hospital of Saint-Étienne & EA 7423, Troubles du Comportement Alimentaire, Addictions et Poids Extrêmes (TAPE), Université Jean Monnet, Saint-Etienne, France
| | - Corinne Dupont
- University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Research on Healthcare Performance (RESHAPE) INSERM U1290 & AURORE Perinatal Network, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Croix-Rousse Hospital, Lyon, France
| | - Julien Dubreucq
- Marc Jeannerod Institute of Cognitive Sciences UMR 5229, CNRS & Claude Bernard University, Lyon, France
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, University Hospital of Saint-Étienne, Saint-Etienne, France
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Howard LM, Trevillion K, Potts L, Heslin M, Pickles A, Byford S, Carson LE, Dolman C, Jennings S, Johnson S, Jones I, McDonald R, Pawlby S, Powell C, Seneviratne G, Shallcross R, Stanley N, Wieck A, Abel KM. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of psychiatric mother and baby units: quasi-experimental study. Br J Psychiatry 2022; 221:628-636. [PMID: 35505514 DOI: 10.1192/bjp.2022.48] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Psychiatric mother and baby units (MBUs) are recommended for severe perinatal mental illness, but effectiveness compared with other forms of acute care remains unknown. AIMS We hypothesised that women admitted to MBUs would be less likely to be readmitted to acute care in the 12 months following discharge, compared with women admitted to non-MBU acute care (generic psychiatric wards or crisis resolution teams (CRTs)). METHOD Quasi-experimental cohort study of women accessing acute psychiatric care up to 1 year postpartum in 42 healthcare organisations across England and Wales. Primary outcome was readmission within 12 months post-discharge. Propensity scores were used to account for systematic differences between MBU and non-MBU participants. Secondary outcomes included assessment of cost-effectiveness, experience of services, unmet needs, perceived bonding, observed mother-infant interaction quality and safeguarding outcome. RESULTS Of 279 women, 108 (39%) received MBU care, 62 (22%) generic ward care and 109 (39%) CRT care only. The MBU group (n = 105) had similar readmission rates to the non-MBU group (n = 158) (aOR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.04, P = 0.29; an absolute difference of -5%, 95% CI -14 to 4%). Service satisfaction was significantly higher among women accessing MBUs compared with non-MBUs; no significant differences were observed for any other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS We found no significant differences in rates of readmission, but MBU advantage might have been masked by residual confounders; readmission will also depend on quality of care after discharge and type of illness. Future studies should attempt to identify the effective ingredients of specialist perinatal in-patient and community care to improve outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise M Howard
- Section of Women's Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Kylee Trevillion
- Section of Women's Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Laura Potts
- Biostatistics and Health Informatics, King's College London, UK
| | - Margaret Heslin
- King's Health Economics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Andrew Pickles
- Biostatistics and Health Informatics, King's College London, UK
| | - Sarah Byford
- King's Health Economics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Lauren E Carson
- Section of Women's Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Clare Dolman
- Section of Women's Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Stacey Jennings
- Section of Women's Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | | | - Ian Jones
- National Centre for Mental Health, Division of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, Cardiff University, UK
| | - Rebecca McDonald
- Section of Women's Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Susan Pawlby
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Claire Powell
- Section of Women's Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | | | - Rebekah Shallcross
- Section of Women's Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
| | - Nicky Stanley
- School of Social Work, Care and Community, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | - Angelika Wieck
- Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Kathryn M Abel
- Centre for Women's Mental Health, University of Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Howard LM, Abel KM, Atmore KH, Bick D, Bye A, Byford S, Carson LE, Dolman C, Heslin M, Hunter M, Jennings S, Johnson S, Jones I, Taylor BL, McDonald R, Milgrom J, Morant N, Nath S, Pawlby S, Potts L, Powell C, Rose D, Ryan E, Seneviratne G, Shallcross R, Stanley N, Trevillion K, Wieck A, Pickles A. Perinatal mental health services in pregnancy and the year after birth: the ESMI research programme including RCT. PROGRAMME GRANTS FOR APPLIED RESEARCH 2022. [DOI: 10.3310/ccht9881] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Background
It is unclear how best to identify and treat women with mental disorders in pregnancy and the year after birth (i.e. the perinatal period).
Objectives
(1) To investigate how best to identify depression at antenatal booking [work package (WP) 1]. (2) To estimate the prevalence of mental disorders in early pregnancy (WP1). (3) To develop and examine the efficacy of a guided self-help intervention for mild to moderate antenatal depression delivered by psychological well-being practitioners (WP1). (4) To examine the psychometric properties of the perinatal VOICE (Views On Inpatient CarE) measure of service satisfaction (WP3). (5) To examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of services for women with acute severe postnatal mental disorders (WPs 1–3). (6) To investigate women’s and partners’/significant others’ experiences of different types of care (WP2).
Design
Objectives 1 and 2 – a cross-sectional survey stratified by response to Whooley depression screening questions. Objective 3 – an exploratory randomised controlled trial. Objective 4 – an exploratory factor analysis, including test–retest reliability and validity assessed by association with the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire contemporaneous satisfaction scores. Objective 5 – an observational cohort study using propensity scores for the main analysis and instrumental variable analysis using geographical distance to mother and baby unit. Objective 6 – a qualitative study.
Setting
English maternity services and generic and specialist mental health services for pregnant and postnatal women.
Participants
Staff and users of mental health and maternity services.
Interventions
Guided self-help, mother and baby units and generic care.
Main outcome measures
The following measures were evaluated in WP1(i) – specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value, likelihood ratio, acceptability and population prevalence estimates. The following measures were evaluated in WP1(ii) – participant recruitment rate, attrition and adverse events. The following measure was evaluated in WP2 – experiences of care. The following measures were evaluated in WP3 – psychometric indices for perinatal VOICE and the proportion of participants readmitted to acute care in the year after discharge.
Results
WP1(i) – the population prevalence estimate was 11% (95% confidence interval 8% to 14%) for depression and 27% (95% confidence interval 22% to 32%) for any mental disorder in early pregnancy. The diagnostic accuracy of two depression screening questions was as follows: a weighted sensitivity of 0.41, a specificity of 0.95, a positive predictive value of 0.45, a negative predictive value of 0.93 and a likelihood ratio (positive) of 8.2. For the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, the diagnostic accuracy was as follows: a weighted sensitivity of 0.59, a specificity of 0.94, a positive predictive value of 0.52, a negative predictive value of 0.95 and a likelihood ratio (positive) of 9.8. Most women reported that asking about depression at the antenatal booking appointment was acceptable, although this was reported as being less acceptable for women with mental disorders and/or experiences of abuse. Cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that both the Whooley depression screening questions and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale were more cost-effective than with the Whooley depression screening questions followed by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale or no-screen option. WP1(ii) – 53 women with depression in pregnancy were randomised. Twenty-six women received modified guided self-help [with 18 (69%) women attending four or more sessions] and 27 women received usual care. Three women were lost to follow-up (follow-up for primary outcome: 92%). At 14 weeks post randomisation, women receiving guided self-help reported fewer depressive symptoms than women receiving usual care (adjusted effect size −0.64, 95% confidence interval −1.30 to 0.06). Costs and quality-adjusted life-years were similar, resulting in a 50% probability of guided self-help being cost-effective compared with usual care at National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost per quality-adjusted life-year thresholds. The slow recruitment rate means that a future definitive larger trial is not feasible. WP2 – qualitative findings indicate that women valued clinicians with specialist perinatal expertise across all services, but for some women generic services were able to provide better continuity of care. Involvement of family members and care post discharge from acute services were perceived as poor across services, but there was also ambivalence among some women about increasing family involvement because of a complex range of factors. WP3(i) – for the perinatal VOICE, measures from exploratory factor analysis suggested that two factors gave an adequate fit (comparative fit index = 0.97). Items loading on these two dimensions were (1) those concerning aspects of the service relating to the care of the mother and (2) those relating to care of the baby. The factors were positively correlated (0.49; p < 0.0001). Total scores were strongly associated with service (with higher satisfaction for mother and baby units, 2 degrees of freedom; p < 0.0001) and with the ‘gold standard’ Client Service Questionnaire total score (test–retest intraclass correlation coefficient 0.784, 95% confidence interval 0.643 to 0.924; p < 0.0001). WP3(ii) – 263 of 279 women could be included in the primary analysis, which shows that the odds of being readmitted to acute care was 0.95 times higher for women who were admitted to a mother and baby unit than for those not admitted to a mother and baby unit (0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.04; p = 0.29). Sensitivity analysis using an instrumental variable found a markedly more significant effect of admission to mother and baby units (p < 0.001) than the primary analysis. Mother and baby units were not found to be cost-effective at 1 month post discharge because of the costs of care in a mother and baby unit. Cost-effectiveness advantages may exist if the cost of mother and baby units is offset by savings from reduced readmissions in the longer term.
Limitations
Policy and service changes had an impact on recruitment. In observational studies, residual confounding is likely.
Conclusions
Services adapted for the perinatal period are highly valued by women and may be more effective than generic services. Mother and baby units have a low probability of being cost-effective in the short term, although this may vary in the longer term.
Future work
Future work should include examination of how to reduce relapses, including in after-care following discharge, and how better to involve family members.
Trial registration
This trial is registered as ISRCTN83768230 and as study registration UKCRN ID 16403.
Funding
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 10, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise M Howard
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Kathryn M Abel
- Centre for Women’s Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Katie H Atmore
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Debra Bick
- Division of Women and Children’s Health, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Amanda Bye
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Sarah Byford
- King’s Health Economics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Lauren E Carson
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Clare Dolman
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Margaret Heslin
- King’s Health Economics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Myra Hunter
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Stacey Jennings
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Sonia Johnson
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK
| | - Ian Jones
- Institute of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neuroscience, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | | | - Rebecca McDonald
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Jeannette Milgrom
- Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Parent–Infant Research Institute, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Nicola Morant
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK
| | - Selina Nath
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Susan Pawlby
- Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Laura Potts
- Biostatistics and Health Informatics, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Claire Powell
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Diana Rose
- Service User Research Enterprise, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Elizabeth Ryan
- Biostatistics and Health Informatics, King’s College London, London, UK
| | | | - Rebekah Shallcross
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Nicky Stanley
- School of Social Work, Care and Community, University of Central Lancashire, Harrington, UK
| | - Kylee Trevillion
- Section of Women’s Mental Health, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Angelika Wieck
- Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Andrew Pickles
- Biostatistics and Health Informatics, King’s College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|