State anxiety in pregnancies affected by obstetric complications: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Maternal mental health status remains an important area of study due to its influence on maternal health outcomes. Past reviews on anxiety in pregnancy have included multiple mental health diagnoses and pre-existing conditions. A systematic review was performed to understand maternal state anxiety during pregnancies affected by obstetrical complications. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases was performed including quantitative, primary studies in the English language. The population of interest was women whose pregnancies were affected by maternal and/or fetal obstetric (not pre-existing) complications with state anxiety as the outcome. Twenty-six studies met the inclusion and methodological criteria and were included in the review. RESULTS: The review revealed that 20% to 100% of women experiencing pregnancies affected by obstetric complications had high levels of state anxiety, and these rates are negatively influenced by complication type and severity, demographic characteristics, and maternal perceptions and expectations. Overall, antenatal state anxiety was shown to improve over the course of the pregnancy, though levels remained above clinical thresholds. LIMITATIONS: This review was based only on English peer-reviewed articles, many of which used convenience sampling with homogenous samples, limiting generalizability. Additional limitations include how anxiety prevalence was aggregated due to differences in measurement across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety is prevalent among women experiencing pregnancies affected by obstetric complications. Based on this review, we recommend that all women treated for obstetric complications are screened for anxiety; facilitating detection, referral, and treatment, ultimately contributing to optimal maternal outcomes.

Approach to treating cystic fibrosis pulmonary exacerbations varies widely across US CF care centers.

There is no standard definition of a CF pulmonary exacerbation universally accepted by clinicians. We aimed to investigate the variability of clinical practice among US CF clinicians in the diagnosis and treatment of exacerbations. Using clinical vignettes, we examined if variation in the identification and treatment of CF exacerbations is common, if practice patterns differ between CF care centers and what clinical factors determine treatment. Twenty-eight clinical cases were developed by varying five clinical factors. Participants were given four options for treatment of the patient described in each vignette. Cases were sent via email to a convenience sample of 112 CF clinicians from 13 US CF centers, with 109 clinicians participating (97.3%). 2,792 of the 3,052 cases received a response (91.5%). ANOVA demonstrated variation in rater scores was explained by case scenario and by care center (P < 0.0001). Examining the frequency of each treatment strategy demonstrated no absolute treatment consensus for any given scenario and variability within and between care centers. Direct logistic regression revealed that systemic symptoms (OR = 5.95), decreased O(2) saturation (OR = 4.99) and decreased FEV(1) (OR = 3.78) had a greater effects on the decision to treat a case with IV antibiotics than increased cough/sputum (OR = 2.19) and crackles present on physical examination (OR = 2.10). Similar findings were demonstrated with a cluster analysis. There was surprising variation in the identification and treatment of pulmonary exacerbations by CF clinicians. Variation was present between CF Centers, within each CF center and at the individual clinician level. This study provides additional evidence for the need of a standard definition for a CF pulmonary exacerbation.