The Psychological Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Pregnant Women

Stress Coping Strategies of Pregnant Women during COVID-19 Pandemic: a Literature Review

BACKGROUND

It is widely recognized that the COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected the psychological well-being of pregnant and postpartum women. Consequently, it is of the utmost importance to identify effective strategies that can mitigate the negative emotional experiences of pregnant women during any pandemic period.

AIM

This review seeks to identify the most effective approaches to managing stress among pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic and emphasizes the significance of providing support to pregnant women throughout this period.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was conducted, and studies that met the inclusion criteria were analysed. The primary criterion was that the studies examined strategies employed by pregnant women to cope with stress during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included in the analysis. Adaptive coping strategies were found to be more effective in ameliorating the impact of the pandemic on mental health compared to dysfunctional coping strategies. While pregnant women generally exhibited maladaptive coping behaviours, psychological support and promoting beneficial coping strategies were the most frequently described methods for improving their mental health during the pandemic and preventing adverse outcomes of pregnancy. Additionally, avoiding misinformation and seeking social and family support were considered essential components of effective support.

CONCLUSION

It is crucial to prioritize psychological, emotional and mental health support for pregnant women during the pandemic.

The Psychological Impact on Romanian Women Infected with SARS-CoV-2 during Pregnancy

BACKGROUND

It is well-known that the uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic has an indirect negative impact on pregnant women's mental health, given the fact that pregnant women are more vulnerable emotionally and psychologically than non-pregnant women. The aim of this study was to evaluate the maternal psychological impact on Romanian women who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy and their concerns and to determine which are the best measures to prevent negative outcomes.

METHODS

A 40-item questionnaire was created for data collection and was shared on social platforms (Facebook and Instagram) and also with obstetric communities between February 2021 and January 2023. Our cross-sectional survey recruited 317 Romanian pregnant women who suffered from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among general questions about their life and pregnancy during the pandemic, the survey included questions about their SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, their concerns and how they perceived this period in order to evaluate their emotional status.

RESULTS

Of 317 women recruited, 91% of them had a mild to moderate form of COVID-19, and 2% had serious symptoms. Only 9% of women were hospitalized, 4% of women considered that the SARS-CoV-2 infection affected their physical condition to a great extent, and 8% considered to be affected in terms of mental state to a great extent. The main negative feelings of pregnant women during the COVID-19 disease were the fear regarding the possibility of affecting the pregnancy and the concern for their life (51.4%). These increase the risk of developing anxiety or depression. Pregnant women who contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection faced negative feelings, especially those with a severe form of the disease or who recovered with difficulty after the disease. Patients who required hospitalization reported an impairment of the mental state to a great extent and to a very great extent with a frequency of approximately two times and four times higher than non-hospitalized patients, respectively (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively). Also, giving birth during SARS-CoV-2 and the difficulty of accessing medical services represented a high level of stress. Also, 47% of patients who reported difficulty accessing medical services during the illness evaluated their mental state significantly less favorably.

CONCLUSION

Preventive measures are essential to minimizing the negative psychological impact of COVID-19 disease during pregnancy among pregnant women. The medical treatment of COVID-19 disease during pregnancy should be prioritized, but emotional and mental health support must also be provided.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Contraception Awareness and Mental Well-Being in Teenagers and Young Adult Women: A Three-Year Cross-Sectional Analysis

During the COVID-19 pandemic, significant shifts occurred in reproductive health, especially among teenagers and young adult women in Romania. This study, conducted from 2020 to 2022, aimed to longitudinally assess contraceptive awareness and its correlation with mental well-being in this demographic. A cohort of 210 participants aged 15-25, with a history of wanted or unwanted pregnancy, was studied. The research involved collaborations with Romanian educational institutions and strict adherence to ethical standards. Participants' data on contraceptive knowledge and practices were analyzed, considering factors like substance use and prior sexual education. Mental well-being was evaluated using the SF-36, WHOQOL-BREF, GAD-7, and PHQ-9 scales. The study revealed a positive correlation between increased contraceptive knowledge and improved mental health scores. In 2022, 68% of participants displayed proficient contraceptive awareness, up from 52% in 2020. Those with good contraceptive knowledge had an average SF-36 score of 72, indicating a better quality of life, compared to a score of 58 among those with limited knowledge. Furthermore, there was a notable decrease in GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores among individuals with better contraceptive awareness, suggesting reduced anxiety and depression levels. The SF-36 survey results showed significant improvements across the years: the physical score increased from 52.1 (±6.3) in 2020 to 56.5 (±6.8) in 2022, the mental score from 51.4 (±7.2) to 55.0 (±6.9), and the total score from 53.6 (±7.9) to 57.5 (±8.0). WHOQOL-BREF results showed a substantial increase in the social domain score from 53.6 (±18.2) in 2020 to 63.0 (±20.5) in 2022. GAD-7 scores declined from 7.9 (±2.6) in 2020 to 6.5 (±3.3) in 2022, indicating a decrease in anxiety symptoms. PHQ-9 scores, measuring depression, also showed a downward trend, from 4.8 (±2.2) in 2020 to 3.9 (±2.8) in 2022. These findings highlight the intertwined nature of contraceptive awareness and mental well-being. The improvements in contraceptive awareness positively impacted mental health outcomes, emphasizing the need for targeted educational interventions in this demographic, particularly during global crises like the pandemic.

Assessment of Levels of Anxiety and Fear of Covid-19 in a Population of Pregnant Women in Spain

Objective

The aim of the study was to assess the levels of fear and anxiety in the particularly vulnerable population group of women during pregnancy.

Methods

Cross-sectional study between March 2022 and July 2022 involving 978 pregnant women aged 16 to 50 years. It was carried out based on the scale for the assessment of fear and anxiety in pregnant women (AMICO_Pregnant) and the collection of sociodemographic data. Normality analysis was performed prior to univariate and bivariate statistical analysis.

Results

The sample was composed of a total of 978 pregnant women. The mean of the AMICO_Pregnant scale was intermediate (5.04 points; SD=2.36). The bivariate analysis showed a statistically significant relationship between the AMICO_Pregnant scale and the following variables: vaccination schedule status, contact with the disease, weeks of gestation, altered delivery or birth plan.

Conclusion

Women with pregnancies closer to term, with no contact with the disease, without a complete vaccination schedule, or who had undergone changes in their delivery or birth plans, showed higher levels of fear and anxiety.

COVID-19 retreats and world recovers: A silver lining in the dark cloud

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19), which the World Health Organization classified as the Sixth Public Health Emergency Of International Concern (PHEIC) on January 30, 2020, is no longer a PHEIC. Millions were affected due to unawareness. The increase in fatalities and shortage of medicine was the first outrage of COVID-19. As per the Johns Hopkins COVID-19 resource center database, it was observed that the disease has spread dynamically across 200+ nations worldwide affecting more than 600 million people from 2019 to 2023, and over thousands of people were victimized regularly at a 2% mortality rate (approx.). In the midway, the mutant variants of concern like omicron, and delta have also created havoc and caused significant impact on public health, global economy, and lifestyle. Since 2019, 3 years now passed and the dynamic disease statistics seem decelerated; moreover, the prevalence of COVID-19 is also fading. The Johns Hopkins resource center has also stopped recording the data of the global pandemic recently from March 10, 2023. Hence, based on the facts, we are presenting a concise report on the pandemic from 2019 to 2023, which includes a brief discussion of the global pandemic. We have highlighted global epidemiology, emphasizing the Indian COVID scenario, vaccination across the globe, and the psychosocial and geopolitical consequences of COVID-19 with a brief background to pathology, clinical management, and the worldwide response against triage. A lot has changed and still needs to change after three tough years of COVID-19. Even though science has progressed and advanced research in medicine is pointing toward future generations, there is no standard care supplied for COVID-19-like calamities. COVID-19 cases might have declined but its influence on the society is still stagnant. This COVID experience has taught us that, despite our bleak beginnings, there is always hope for the future and that we must act with foresight to improve things for future generations.

The Impact of COVID-19-Related Psychological Stress on Fetoplacental Circulation: A Doppler Scan of Umbilical Vessels in Third-Trimester Antenatal Women

INTRODUCTION

The placenta is an important organ of pregnancy. A multitude of physiological and pathological factors influence blood flow in the placenta during pregnancy. However, the fetal effects of maternal psychological stress were inconclusive. The recent COVID-19 pandemic had unprecedented economic, social, and psychological effects. The effect of COVID-19-induced psychological stress in antenatal women and its resultant fetal impact were studied by observing the Doppler waveforms of the uterine and umbilical arteries.

METHODS

The cross-sectional study was conducted on 26 healthy third-trimester antenatal women who satisfied pre-set inclusion and exclusion criteria. A pandemic-related pregnancy stress scale (PREPS) was used to evaluate the stress in pregnant women and categorize it into mild, moderate, and severe levels. The Doppler ultrasound of the uterine and umbilical vessels was done along with a routine growth scan in the third trimester of pregnancy. The arterial waveforms, Pulsatility index (PI) of uterine and umbilical arteries, umbilical vein blood flow, and biometric parameters of the fetus were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Seventeen of the 26 participants were found to be moderately stressed. Among the three dimensions of the PREPS tool, the perinatal infection stress dimension was expressed predominantly. A strong expression of the positive affirmation dimension was seen in antenatal women. The mean Pulsatility index in the mild, moderate, and severe groups was 0.74, 0.93, and 0.63, respectively. The association between the PREPS score and the Pulsatility index of the umbilical artery alone was found to be significant at p=0.02.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic caused moderate to severe levels of psychological stress in pregnant women. The statistically significant association between the PREPS score and the umbilical artery PI indicates possible fetoplacental compromise, suggesting the need for cognitive therapy to manage psychological stress in antenatal women.

Outcomes of low-risk birth care during the Covid-19 pandemic: A cohort study from a tertiary care center in Lithuania

According to the World Health Organization, midwife-led care is the most appropriate and cost-effective type of perinatal care. As the Covid-19 pandemic with its drastic changes and challenges for the health systems and the medical staff made large adjustments to the healthcare delivery system, midwife-led care became an even more important supportive tool in maintaining unnecessary interventions. This retrospective cohort study aims to compare the outcomes of midwife-led care and team-led care in low-risk births between the Covid-19 pandemic and non-Covid-19 pandemic period. The total studied population was 1,185 singleton births and consisted of 727 births during the non-Covid-19 period and 458 births from the Covid-19 period. The study revealed the safety of low-risk birth care during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic in both groups. The maternal and perinatal outcomes remained stable without an increased rate of unsuccessful vaginal births and newborn asphyxia; moreover, birth care of low-risk women provided by midwives preserved autonomy, integrity, and resistance to responding to a disaster. The aforementioned results exhibit that high-quality, safe supervision by midwives in low-risk births can be provided even in high-stress circumstances.

Parental experiences with changes in maternity care during the Covid-19 pandemic: A mixed-studies systematic review

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women were identified as a high-risk and vulnerable group. To reduce risk of transmission, maternity healthcare services were modified to limit exposure but maintain services for pregnant women. However, the change in hospital practice may have compromised quality maternal care standards. Therefore, this review aims to explore parental experiences and views with maternity care received from healthcare institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A mixed studies systematic review was conducted. Six electronic databases (Medline, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and Maternity and Infant Care) were searched for qualitative, observational, and mixed method studies from the year 2019 to February 2022. Study quality was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Quantitative findings were converted to narrative findings. Data was synthesised thematically using a convergent synthesis design.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight articles were included. Four themes were generated: (1) Distress associated with COVID-19 regulations (perception of hospital restrictions, confusion with ever changing policies), (2) adaptability with maternity services (prenatal: changes in birth plans, prenatal: altered antenatal appointments, education, and care, intrapartum: medicalization of birth, postpartum: varied views on care received and Breastfeeding woes, postpartum: skin-to-skin contact and mother infant bonding) (3) importance of support persons, and (4) future direction for maternity services.

CONCLUSIONS

Parental experiences highlighted how maternity care during the COVID-19 pandemic did not adhere to WHO standards of quality maternity care. This calls for healthcare institutions to continuously appraise the implementation of restrictive practices that deviate from evidence-based frameworks underpinning quality care.

Psychological profile and mood disturbance of women who gave birth during the COVID-19 pandemic in Romania

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to outline the emotional profile and the mood disturbance of women who gave birth during Emergency and Alert states in Covid-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out to investigate how the emergency and alert states due to Covid-19 affected the emotional profile and the mood disturbance of pregnant women who gave birth during these times. We included 244 postpartum women, divided into two groups: 124 women during the State of Emergency and another 120 women during the State of Alert. After expressing their informed consent, they completed an anonymous questionnaire that collected demographic data and the Profile of Mood States Questionnaire, as well as a follow-up survey. Data analysis was performed using the statistical program SPSS 24.0.

RESULTS

Out of the 300 questionnaires distributed, we collected 244 valid questionnaires. 45.2% of State of Emergency group and 53.3% of State of Alert group experienced Anxiety, 16.9% of State of Emergency group, respectively 18.3% of State of Alert group, Depression, and 25% of State of Emergency group respectively 34.2% of State of Alert group, Distress. Compared to the ideal Iceberg profile, the emotional profile of both groups presented an inverted graph for Anxiety and Depression and much lower values for Vigor. Only 35.5% of State of Emergency group and 16.7% of State of Alert group received information concerning the virus, symptoms, and evolution of the disease from the specialists who monitored their pregnancy and 25.8% of State of Emergency group respectively 11.7% of State of Alert group received information about measures to prevent contamination and infection. Psycho-emotional and mood disturbance was more pronounced among State of Alert group.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a significant psycho-emotional alteration of surveyed women during the pandemic, worsened by the radical measures of the State of Emergency and associated with the major deficiency of care services in supplying valid information and counseling for pregnant women's safety in the State of Alert. There is a highlighted need to pay more attention to the psychological profile of pregnant women and to modernize the health services in this field and adapt them to pandemic situations with the use of modern virtual techniques. In addition, the Romanian health care system should round off the team responsible for the care of mother and child with midwives, internationally recognized very skilled in informing, monitoring, counseling, and support in this field.

Fear and Anxiety in Pregnant Women During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review

Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore the impact of the 2020-2022 pandemic on the levels of fear and anxiety in pregnant women and to identify risk and protective factors. Methods: A systematic review was conducted. Electronic databases were consulted for studies published between January 2020 and August 2022. The methodological quality was assessed using a critical appraisal tool for non-randomised studies. Results: Seventeen studies were included in the review. A high prevalence of levels of fear and anxiety were observed. Risk factors such as unplanned pregnancy, poor support from partners, or intolerance of uncertainty were identified for high levels of fear. Regarding anxiety, risk factors such as maternal age, social support, financial status, or concern about being able to maintain antenatal follow-ups were identified. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the mental health of pregnant women through increased levels of fear and anxiety. It has not been possible to establish a relationship between significant factors such as gestational age or health emergency control measures with high levels of fear or anxiety.

Facing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic: How Can We Allocate Outpatient Doctor Resources More Effectively?

The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant damage to global healthcare systems. Previous studies regarding COVID-19’s impact on outpatient numbers focused only on a specific department, lacking research data for multiple departments in general hospitals. We assessed differences in COVID-19’s impact on outpatient numbers for different departments to help hospital managers allocate outpatient doctor resources more effectively during the pandemic. We compared the outpatient numbers of 24 departments in a general hospital in Beijing in 2019 and 2020. We also examined an indicator not mentioned in previous studies, monthly departmental patient reservation rates. The results show that, compared with 2019, 2020 outpatient numbers decreased overall by 33.36%. Ten departments’ outpatient numbers decreased >33.36%; however, outpatient numbers increased in two departments. In 2020, the overall patient reservation rate in 24 departments was 82.22% of the 2019 reservation rate; the rates in 14 departments were <82.22%. Moreover, patient reservation rates varied across different months. Our research shows that COVID-19’s impact on different departments also varied. Additionally, our research suggests that well-known departments will be less affected by COVID-19, as will departments related to tumor treatment, where there may also be an increase in patient numbers. Patient reservation rates are an indicator worthy of attention. We suggest that hospital managers classify departments according to changes in outpatient numbers and patient reservation rates and adopt accurate, dynamic, and humanized management strategies to allocate outpatient doctor resources.

Pregnancy during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative examination of ways of coping

The COVID-19 pandemic and related public health restrictions have impacted the mental health and coping strategies of many population groups, including people who are pregnant. Our study sought to explore the ways that pregnant people described coping with stressors associated with the pandemic. N = 5879 pregnant individuals completed the pan-Canadian Pregnancy During the COVID-19 Pandemic Survey between April and December 2020. We used descriptive statistics to quantify sociodemographic characteristics and thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2019) to analyze n = 3316 open-ended text responses to the question "Can you tell us what things you are doing to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic?" The average age of participants was 32 years (SD = 4.4), with the majority identifying as White (83.6%), female (99.7%), married (61.5%), having completed post-secondary education (90.0%), and working full-time (75.4%). We categorized participant responses into two overarching thematic dimensions: (1) ways of coping and (2) coping challenges. Ways of coping included the following main themes: (1) taking care of oneself, (2) connecting socially, (3) engaging in pandemic-specific coping strategies, (4) keeping busy, (5) taking care of others, (6) creating a sense of normalcy, (7) changing perspectives, and (8) practicing spirituality. Coping challenges included the following: (1) the perception of coping poorly, (2) loss of coping methods, (3) managing frontline or essential work, and (4) worries about the future. Findings highlight important implications for targeted prenatal supports delivered remotely, including opportunities for social support, prenatal care, and mental health strategies.

The psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and a SARS-CoV-2 testing programme on obstetric patients and healthcare workers

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to describe the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the specific impact of a universal SARS-CoV-2 testing programme on obstetric patients and healthcare workers at The Ottawa Hospital.

Methods:

This was a follow-up survey study of obstetric healthcare workers and then-pregnant patients who participated in a SARS-CoV-2 testing programme conducted in The Ottawa Hospital obstetrical triage units from 19 October to 17 November 2020. Surveys explored the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the testing programme on participants’ psychological well-being. Responses were collected from April to September 2021. Descriptive summary statistics were calculated for both groups.

Results:

During hospitalization for delivery, obstetric patients (n = 143) worried about giving COVID-19 to their new baby (88.11%), catching COVID-19 (83.22%), and giving COVID-19 to their partner (76.22%). Patients felt relief at being tested for COVID-19 during the universal testing programme (24.65%) and at getting their results (28.87%). Patients also believed that universal SARS-CoV-2 testing was a good way to slow COVID-19 spread (79.72%), reduce anxiety (75.52%), and increase relief (76.22%). In addition, patients felt good about participating in research that could help others (91.61%). Among obstetric healthcare workers (n = 94), job satisfaction decreased and job stress increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. The universal testing programme led to minor increases in healthcare worker job stress and burden, particularly among nurses, but the majority (85.23%) believed it was a valuable research initiative.

Conclusion:

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative psychological impact on obstetric patients and healthcare workers. Universal SARS-CoV-2 testing was generally viewed favourably and may serve as an effective strategy for estimating COVID-19 prevalence without adding undue stress onto patients and healthcare workers during the pandemic.

Coping Strategies and Health-Related Quality of Life in Pregnant Women with SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Background and Objectives: As maternal deaths associated with the SARS-CoV-2 infection remain at several times greater than the general population, significant factors that might contribute to the higher mortality and morbidity rate are the psychological impact of the disease and pregnancy itself. Therefore, the current study's main objective was to assess how pregnant women react and cope with the stress of COVID-19 disease and how it influences their overall health and quality of life in healthcare facilities. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we included 304 pregnant women who successfully completed standardized forms to assess our topics of interest, comprising of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Short Form Health Survey-12, the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory scale, the CORE-Outcome Measure Questionnaire, and the Quality from the Patient's Perspective questionnaire. Results: Unemployed, pregnant women living in poverty in the rural areas had higher SARS-CoV-2 infection rates during pregnancy. They faced higher anxiety levels and depression rates, with associated increased physical burden and exhaustion. However, these findings are not influenced by hospital care since it remained unchanged among COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 maternity units, excepting significantly lower technical competence scores of COVID-19 facilities. Conclusions: As the pandemic's consequences emerge and additional outbreaks occur, care must prioritize the additional physical burden experienced by pregnant women who have contracted COVID-19, as well as psychological, emotional, and mental health support.

Fatal Association of Mirror and Eisenmenger Syndrome during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Mirror syndrome (MS) or Ballantyne's syndrome is a rare maternal condition that can be life-threatening for both mother and fetus. The condition is characterized by maternal signs and symptoms similar to those seen in preeclampsia in the setting of fetal hydrops. Despite recent advances in the field of maternal-fetal medicine, the etiopathogenesis of MS remains elusive. For patients and doctors, the COVID-19 pandemic has become an extra hurdle to overcome. The following case illustrates how patients' non-compliance associated with mirror syndrome and SARS-CoV-2 infection led to the tragic end of a 19-year-old patient. Therefore, knowledge of the signs and symptoms of mirror syndrome should always be part of the armamentarium of every obstetrician.