Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
J Womens Health (Larchmt) ; 31(6): 772-778, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778870


Objective: Studies examining the impact of natural disasters noted that in the setting of stable rates of depression, postpartum depression (PPD) increased in vulnerable subgroups. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may similarly impact maternal health. This study aimed to characterize the effect of COVID-19 on the incidence of PPD and to identify vulnerable subgroups. Methods: Retrospective chart review of maternal-newborn dyads was conducted over two epochs: pre-COVID-19 (January 1-June 1, 2019) and during-COVID-19 (January 1-June 1, 2020). PPD was defined as an Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score of ≧ 10 at any postnatal appointment. Prevalence of depression and anxiety was recorded. Data were analyzed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney, and t-tests. Results: Among 1061 dyads (557 in the 2019 epoch, 504 in the 2020 epoch), the epochs had similar clinical and demographic characteristics. Incidence proportion of PPD was similar (16.9% to 18.1%, p = 0.67). In subgroup analyses, this outcome was also similar among primiparous mothers (17.4% to 22.2%, p = 0.22) and publicly insured mothers (23.9% to 25.9%, p = 0.78). The 2020 epoch exhibited higher prevalence of current depression (9.9% to 14.3%, p = 0.03) and anxiety (10.1% to 18.7%, p < 0.001). However, incidence proportion of PPD decreased among women with current mental health diagnoses (41.5% to 31.3%, p = 0.19). Conclusions: A stable PPD incidence despite increased prevalence of current mood disorders highlights the complexity of the biopsychosocial milieu contributing to PPD. Further study of psychiatric care access and treatment is an important next step in understanding relationships between current mood disorders and PPD during the pandemic.

COVID-19 , Depression, Postpartum , COVID-19/epidemiology , Depression, Postpartum/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Mothers/psychology , Pandemics , Postpartum Period/psychology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Tuberculin
Am J Surg ; 2022 Apr 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1767861


BACKGROUND: During the pandemic, hospitals implemented disaster plans to conserve resources while maintaining patient care. It was unclear how these plans impacted injury care and trauma surgeons. STUDY DESIGN: A 16 question survey assessing COVID-related hospital policy and resource allocation pre-COVID-19 peak (March), and a 19 question post-peak (June) survey was distributed to Trauma/Critical Care attending's via social media and the Western Trauma Association member email list. RESULTS: There were 120 pre- and 134 post-peak respondents. Most (95%) altered trauma PPE components, a nd 67% noted changes in their admission population pre-peak while 80% did so post-peak. Penetrating injury increased 56% at Level 1 centers and 27% at Level 2 centers. Altered ICU and transfusion criteria were noted with 25% relocating TBI patients, 17% revised rib fracture admission criteria, and 23% adjusted transfusion practices. Importantly, 12% changed their massive transfusion protocol, with 11% reducing the symptomatic transfusion threshold from 7 g/dL to 6 g/dL. Half (50%) disclosed impediments to patient care including PPE shortages and COVID test-related procedural delay (Fig. 2). While only 14% felt their institution was overwhelmed by COVID, the vast majority (81%) shared durable concerns about personal health and safety. CONCLUSIONS: Disparate approaches to COVID-19 preparedness and response characterize survey respondent facility actions. These disparities, especially between Level 1 and Level 2 centers, represent opportunities for the trauma community to coordinate best-practice planning and implementation in light of future consequence infection or pandemic care.