Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology最新文献

The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of young girls and women who underwent or considered ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) using a systematic review of qualitative studies with thematic synthesis framework. Major electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched from 1946 to May 2020 and reference lists of relevant articles were hand searched. Any studies that described a qualitative inquiry and highlighted the experiences of women with regards to OTC were included. Two independent reviewers screened the title and abstracts and made a selection against inclusion criteria. Main outcomes measures were experiences of women who have considered and/or undergone OTC, decision making in women who underwent or considered OTC and patient education. Nineteen studies were assessed for full text eligibility and four were included in analysis. 144 verbatim quotations from 85 participants in high income countries (UK, USA and Denmark) were included. Two studies adopted grounded theory approach, one phenomenology and one inductive content analysis. Four themes were generated; participants described their experiences as emotional, involving complex decision-making, helping them prepare for the long-term consequences of potentially losing their fertility and hormonal function, as well as their experience being educational. Additionally, the more practical aspects of the procedure such as OTC being invasive as well as costs implications were highlighted. Women and young girls are often involved in making time-sensitive decisions whether or not to undergo OTC. Healthcare professionals involved in the care of young girls and women undergoing this method need to also take into consideration the emotional wellbeing of the patients as well as the time and expertise it requires to help them make an informed decision.

Purpose: The present study was to investigate awareness and attitudes toward female fertility and aging, desire for a child and motherhood, and oocyte freezing for non-medical reasons among women candidates for Social Egg Freezing (SEF).

Materials and methods: This was a cross-sectional study on all 216 women who sought oocyte cryopreservation for nonmedical reasons at Royan Institute. A 24-item self-administered questionnaire measured knowledge and attitudes to SEF. Responses were as yes/no or a 4-point Likert scale.

Results: Only 40% of participants accurately indicated that having a sexual partner does not help to preserve their fertility. A quarter of women correctly recalled chance of pregnancy with unprotected intercourse during a period of a year, for women 20 to 40 years old. Only one-third of respondents accurately identified the age-related fertility decline at 35-39 years. Only 6.9% correctly mentioned the low chance of pregnancy after egg freezing at 35 years old. Almost a third of women knew that the age range of 31-35 years is the right age to freeze an egg with the highest chance of pregnancy. Aging and health of offspring were most influential in women's decisions on SEF.

Conclusion: In conclusion, there was significant gaps in knowledge about age-related fertility decline, and egg cryopreservation conditions and its complications. It is crucial to impart to these women a better knowledge about fertility and a realistic picture about SEF, especially on the number of high-quality retrieved mature oocytes and live birth rates depend on women's age.

Objective: To evaluate objective (saliva cortisol) and subjective (questionnaire) stress levels during the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic compared to before the pandemic and their effects on obstetric and neonatal outcomes.

Methods: This cohort study included 36 women with low-risk, singleton, term deliveries at a tertiary academic center during the COVID-19 pandemic and 49 who delivered before. Physiological stress was evaluated with salivary cortisol measurements, and emotional stress with stress scale questionnaires (0-10) during active and full dilation stages of labor, and 2-min postpartum. Cord blood cortisol and pH were obtained. Delivery mode, complications, and neonatal outcomes were evaluated.

Results: Psychological stress was higher for the COVID-19 group compared to controls during full dilation (6.2 ± 3.4 vs. 4.2 ± 3, p = .009). The COVID-19 group had significantly lower cord cortisol levels (7.3 vs. 13.6 mcg/dl, p = .001). No differences were found regarding salivary cortisol level assessments at active, full dilation and 2-min post-delivery (p = .584, p = .254, p = .829, respectively). No differences were found regarding pH < 7.1 (p = .487), 1- and 5-min Apgar scores < 7 (p = .179) and neonatal weight (p = .958).

Conclusions: Women who delivered during COVID-19 pandemic had higher stress levels at full dilation and lower cord cortisol levels, as may be expected after exposure to a chronic stressor.

Objectives: Determine whether the Fear of Birth Scale (FOBS) is a useful screening instrument for Fear of Childbirth (FoC) and examine the potential added value of screening by analyzing how often pregnant women discuss their FoC during consultation.

Methods: This cross-sectional survey study included nulliparous pregnant women of all gestational ages, recruited via the internet, hospital and midwifery practices. The online questionnaires included the FOBS and Wijma Delivery Expectations Questionnaire version A (W-DEQ A). The latter was used as golden standard for assessing FoC (cutoff: ≥85).

Results: Of the 364 included women, 67 (18.4%) had FoC according to the W-DEQ A. Using the FOBS with a cutoff score of ≥49, the sensitivity was 82.1% and the specificity 81.1%, with 111 (30.5%) women identified as having FoC. Positive predictive value was 49.5% and negative predictive value 95.3%. Of the women with FoC (FOBS ≥49), 68 (61.3%) did not discuss FoC with their caregiver.

Conclusion: The FOBS is a useful screening instrument for FoC. A positive score must be followed by further assessment, either by discussing it during consultation or additional evaluation with the W-DEQ A. The majority of pregnant women with FoC do not discuss their fears, underscoring the need for screening.

Purpose: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a newly emerged respiratory illness, which has spread around the world. Pregnant women are exposed to additional pressure due to the indirect adverse effects of this pandemic on their physical and mental health. Since the psychological wellness framework is weak in developing countries, it is likely that geographical factors affect the prevalence. Therefore, the goal of this meta-analysis is to investigate the prevalence of anxiety and depression among pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: We searched databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library for articles. The quality of studies was determined based on the STROBE checklist. I2 and Cochrane Q-test were used to determine heterogeneity. Fixed effects and/or random effects models were also employed to estimate pooled prevalence.

Results: Since heterogeneity was fairly high in all analyses, the random effect model was used. According to the results of random effects in the meta-analysis, the pooled prevalence was 18.7% (95% CI: 0.06-0.36%; $I^2=99\%,P<0.001$) for anxiety and 25.1% (95% CI: 0.18-0.33%; $I^2=97\%, P<0.001$) for depression. The results of continent subgroup analysis showed that the prevalence of anxiety was higher in western country (38%) than in Asia country (7.8%). The prevalence of anxiety in Italy (38%), Canada (56%), Pakistan (14%), Greece (53%), Sri Lanka (17.5%), and China (0.3-29%) and Iran 3.8% as well as the prevalence of depression in Canada (37%), Belgium (25%), Turkey (35.4%), Sri Lanka (19.5%), and China (11-29%) has been reported.

Conclusion: Covid-19 may impose extra pressure on the emotional wellbeing of pregnant women. Therefore, there is an urgent need for resources to help mitigate anxiety and depression in pregnant women.

Introduction: Menstrual cycle gets affected by various modifiable risk factors. To assess prevalence of various types of menstrual problems, lifestyle and mental health status, identification of variables as predictors for menstrual problems and level of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) awareness among rural and urban population of Punjab, the present study has been carried out.

Methods: The study was conducted from November 2019 to July 2020 in the Malwa region of Punjab, India, with 2673 participants (15-25 years). Epidemiological information was collected using predesigned questionnaire along with depression, anxiety and stress (DASS-21) score mental health assessment tool. MS-Excel (2019) and IBM SPSS 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analysis.

Results: The overall prevalence of different menstrual problems was 60.61%, with dysmenorrhea (50.64%) being most common problem. Body mass index (BMI), menarche age, physical activity, and mental health status are significant (p < 0.05) predictors of menstrual problem both in rural and urban population. Overall, only 3.30% subjects were aware about PCOS.

Conclusion: Dysmenorrhea is the most common menstrual problem, both in rural and urban population. BMI, sedentary lifestyle, electronic gadgets usage, and mental health are associated with menstrual problems. Low awareness on PCOS indicates need to create awareness as the condition can be easily managed with early intervention.

Background: The rapid spread of COVID-19 and the time needed to develop a vaccine or definitive treatment for the disease have caused great anxiety in communities, especially in pregnant women whose high levels of distress may have short and/or long-term maternal and fetal consequence. This study was conducted to investigate the relationship between anxiety induced by COVID-19 and perceived social support in Iranian pregnant women.

Methods: This online cross-sectional study was conducted on 801 pregnant women from all over Iran in 2020. The data were collected using a demographic questionnaire, the multidimensional scale of perceived social support, and the coronavirus disease anxiety scale. A standard multiple linear regression model was used to identify the association between perceived social support and anxiety, controlling for possible confounding variables. Partial r was used as an estimate of effect size.

Results: The mean anxiety score was 10.7 ± 8.0, in which its level was moderate in 122 (15.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 12.8-17.9%)) of the participants, and severe in 28 (3.4%; 95% CI: 2.3-5.0%) of them. The mean score of perceived social support was 48.2 ± 7.6. 6.9% (95% CI: 5.2-8.8%) and 93.1% (95% CI: 91.2-94.8%) of the participants reported mild and moderate levels of perceived social support, respectively. The results of the multiple linear model showed a significant negative correlation between perceived social support and anxiety levels in a way that for every 10 units increase in the perceived social support score, the anxiety level of pregnant women was decreased by 0.8 units (B= -0.08, t= -2.08, p = 0.037), which was a small effect size (partial r = -0.07).

Conclusion: There was a small significant relationship between the perceived social support and COVID-19 anxiety. Further studies are required to identify associated factors of anxiety level during COVID-19 in pregnant women.

Aim: We investigated the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak on social support and anxiety levels in healthcare professionals working in maternity services situated in Trabzon, Turkey.

Materials and methods: Our study was designed retrospectively and observationally. Social support to the participants was measured using a scale called the multidimensional scale of perceived social support (MSPSS). State anxiety scale (STAI TX-1) and trait anxiety scale (STAI TX-2) were used to determine the level of anxiety. All scales were measured before and during the pandemic. Independent t-test and one-way ANOVA were used to analyze the data where p < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results: The participants' demographic data (n = 96) included the mean age of doctors (n = 30), midwives (n = 34), and nurses (n = 32) which were 41.38 ± 4.16/38.58 ± 1.79/37.34 ± 2.19, respectively. Mean gravida was 1.69 ± 2.87/2.23 ± 0.12/2.31 ± 0.14, respectively. Mean BMI was 24.69 ± 2.87/26.04 ± 0.8/25.69 ± 1.98 in the same order (p > 0.05). The total mean values of the MSPSS, STAI TX-1, STAI TX-2 scales before and during the pandemic were found as 66.55 ± 6.63 - 55.25 ± 4.76, 36.71 ± 10.04 - 50.08 ± 11.65, 37.33 ± 8.09 - 53.32 ± 9.94, respectively. A significant difference was found for the mean of all scales amongst the groups (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a significant number of healthcare workers were deprived of social support and their anxiety levels increased.