Prevalence of perinatal post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Holly Jenkins, Zoe Daskalopoulou, C. Opondo, F. Alderdice, G. Fellmeth
{"title":"Prevalence of perinatal post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Holly Jenkins, Zoe Daskalopoulou, C. Opondo, F. Alderdice, G. Fellmeth","doi":"10.1136/bmjph-2023-000215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To systematically synthesise the evidence on prevalence of perinatal post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).Systematic review and meta-analysis.MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Global Health, Global Index Medicus and the grey literature were searched with no language or date restrictions. The final search was carried out on 3 May 2022.Cross-sectional, cohort or case–control studies that assessed the prevalence of PTSD in pregnant or postpartum women in LMICs were included.Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated with 95% CIs and prediction intervals (PI) using random-effects meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted to explore possible sources of statistical heterogeneity.39 studies were included in the systematic review of which 38 were included in meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of clinically diagnosed perinatal PTSD was 4.2% (95% CI 2.2% to 6.8%; 95% PI 0–18%; 15 studies). The pooled prevalence of self-reported perinatal PTSD symptoms was 11.0% (95% CI 7.6% to 15.0%; 95% PI 0–36%; 23 studies). There was no evidence of differences in prevalence according to perinatal stage (antenatal versus postnatal), geographical region, type of setting or study quality.Findings of this review suggest 1 in 10 perinatal women experiences symptoms of PTSD and 1 in 20 experiences clinically diagnosed PTSD. Statistical heterogeneity between studies persisted in subgroup analyses and results should be interpreted with caution. More research from low-income countries is needed to improve understanding of the burden of perinatal PTSD in these settings.CRD42022325072.","PeriodicalId":117861,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2023-000215","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To systematically synthesise the evidence on prevalence of perinatal post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).Systematic review and meta-analysis.MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Global Health, Global Index Medicus and the grey literature were searched with no language or date restrictions. The final search was carried out on 3 May 2022.Cross-sectional, cohort or case–control studies that assessed the prevalence of PTSD in pregnant or postpartum women in LMICs were included.Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated with 95% CIs and prediction intervals (PI) using random-effects meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted to explore possible sources of statistical heterogeneity.39 studies were included in the systematic review of which 38 were included in meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of clinically diagnosed perinatal PTSD was 4.2% (95% CI 2.2% to 6.8%; 95% PI 0–18%; 15 studies). The pooled prevalence of self-reported perinatal PTSD symptoms was 11.0% (95% CI 7.6% to 15.0%; 95% PI 0–36%; 23 studies). There was no evidence of differences in prevalence according to perinatal stage (antenatal versus postnatal), geographical region, type of setting or study quality.Findings of this review suggest 1 in 10 perinatal women experiences symptoms of PTSD and 1 in 20 experiences clinically diagnosed PTSD. Statistical heterogeneity between studies persisted in subgroup analyses and results should be interpreted with caution. More research from low-income countries is needed to improve understanding of the burden of perinatal PTSD in these settings.CRD42022325072.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中低收入国家围产期创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的患病率:系统回顾和荟萃分析
系统综述和荟萃分析。检索了MEDLINE、Embase、PsycINFO、Scopus、Web of Science、Global Health、Global Index Medicus和灰色文献,无语言和日期限制。筛选、数据提取和质量评估由两位审稿人独立完成。采用随机效应荟萃分析法计算汇总的患病率估计值及 95% CI 和预测区间 (PI)。系统综述共纳入 39 项研究,其中 38 项纳入了荟萃分析。经临床诊断的围产期创伤后应激障碍的汇总患病率为 4.2% (95% CI 2.2% to 6.8%; 95% PI 0-18%; 15 项研究)。自我报告的围产期创伤后应激障碍症状的汇总患病率为 11.0% (95% CI 7.6% to 15.0%; 95% PI 0-36%; 23 项研究)。没有证据表明围产期(产前与产后)、地理区域、环境类型或研究质量会导致患病率出现差异。在亚组分析中,不同研究之间仍存在统计异质性,因此应谨慎解释研究结果。需要在低收入国家开展更多研究,以加深对这些国家围产期创伤后应激障碍负担的了解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Psychosocial health stigma related to COVID-19 disease among COVID-19 patients in Jordan: a comparative study Evaluating and mapping the evidence that screening for diabetic foot disease meets the criteria for population-wide screening: a scoping review Effectiveness of direct patient outreach with a narrative naloxone and overdose prevention video to patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy in the USA: the Naloxone Navigator randomised clinical trial Social media use and anxiety levels among school adolescents: a cross-sectional study in Kathmandu, Nepal Community childhood obesity assessment in elementary school, anthropometric indices as screening tools: a community cross-sectional study in Indonesia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1