Social Support and Mental Health in the Postpartum Period in Times of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Spanish Multicentre Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: To explore the depression and anxiety symptoms in the postpartum period during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and to identify potential risk factors. METHODS: A multicentre observational cohort study including 536 women was performed at three hospitals in Spain. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) Scale, the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (MOS-SSS), and the Postpartum Bonding Questionnaire (PBQ) were assessed after birth. Depression (EPDS) and anxiety (STAI) symptoms were measured, and the cut-off scores were set at 10 and 13 for EPDS, and at 40 for STAI. RESULTS: Regarding EPDS, 32.3% (95% CI, 28% to 36.5%) of women had a score ≥ 10, and 17.3% (95% CI, 13.9% to 20.7%) had a score ≥ 13. Women with an STAI score ≥ 40 accounted for 46.8% (95% CI, 42.3% to 51.2%). A lower level of social support (MOS-SSS), a fetal malformation diagnosis and a history of depression (p = 0.000, p = 0.019 and p = 0.043) were independent risk factors for postpartum depression. A lower level of social support and a history of mental health disorders (p = 0.000, p = 0.003) were independent risk factors for postpartum anxiety. CONCLUSION: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, an increase in symptoms of anxiety and depression were observed during the postpartum period.

GESTACOVID project: psychological and perinatal effects in Spanish pregnant women subjected to confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 was declared a pandemic and confinement with movement restriction measures were applied in Spain. Postnatal mental disorders are common but frequently undiagnosed, being a risk period to develop anxiety and depression symptoms. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of confinement as depressive and anxiety symptoms in pregnant women (PrW) and puerperal women (PuW) mental health, as well as obstetric and perinatal outcomes during this period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The self-administered survey consists of a total of 28 questions, the first 16 providing contextual information and the following ones corresponding to the GHQ-12 that has been evaluated in a binomial form. A logistic regression model has been used to assess whether the contextual variables acted as a protective or risk factor and its fitting has been represented by a receiver operating curve. RESULTS: Of the 754 PrW interviewed, 58.22% were screened positive. Confinement time for these was 54.93 ± 9.75 days. The risk factors that were identified after the refinement have been to have a worse general state of health, to be sadder and to be more nervous. Among the protectors have been found to have a higher Apgar 10 score and induction of labor. The area under the adjusted regression adjustment curve was 0.8056. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a high prevalence of depression and anxiety symptoms with strict confinement measures. PrW and PuW must be considered a risk group to develop mental health disorders during disruption circumstances. Using a mental health screening tool could help to identify a group of patients with more risk and to carry out a careful monitoring to allow adequate management.