Disclosure of sensitive material at routine antenatal psychosocial assessment: The role of psychosocial risk and mode of assessment.

PROBLEM: While routine psychosocial assessment is acceptable to most pregnant women, some women will not fully disclose psychosocial concerns to their clinician. AIMS: To assess the impact of psychosocial risk, current symptoms and mode of assessment on women's honesty of disclosure at psychosocial assessment. METHODS: Logistic regression was used to examine associations between disclosure and a range of psychosocial characteristics in women who were 'always honest' and 'not always honest'. Mixed ANOVAs were used to test the influence of mode of assessment and honesty on scores on a repeated measure of psychosocial risk. FINDINGS: 10.8% (N=193 of 1788) of women did not fully disclose at psychosocial assessment. Non-disclosure was associated with a mental health history (aOR=1.78, 95%CI: 1.18-2.67, p<0.01) and lack of social and partner support (aOR=1.74, 95%CI: 1.16-2.62, p<0.05; aOR=2.08, 95%CI: 1.11-3.90, p<0.05, respectively). Those reporting not always being honest at face to face assessment showed a greater increase in psychosocial risk score when the assessment was repeated online via self-report, compared to women who were always honest. DISCUSSION: A history of mental health issues and lack of social and partner support are associated with reduced disclosure at face to face assessment. Online self-report assessment may promote greater disclosure, however this should always be conducted in the context of clinician feedback. CONCLUSION: Greater psychosocial vulnerability is associated with a lower likelihood of full disclosure. Preliminary findings relating to mode of assessment warrant further exploration within a clinical context.

Supporting routine psychosocial assessment in the perinatal period: The concurrent and predictive validity of the Antenatal Risk Questionnaire-Revised.

BACKGROUND: Australian clinical practice guidelines support comprehensive psychosocial assessment as a routine component of maternity care. AIM: To examine the concurrent and predictive validity of the Antenatal Risk Questionnaire-Revised (ANRQ-R) when used across the perinatal period. METHODS: Women completed the ANRQ-R and a diagnostic reference standard (SAGE-SR) in the second and third trimesters and at 3-months postpartum. ANRQ-R test performance for cut-off scores at each time-point was assessed using Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analysis. FINDINGS: Overall sample sizes were N=1166 (second trimester), N=957 (third trimester) and N=796 (3-month postpartum). 6.5%, 5.6% and 6.2% of women met SAGE-SR criteria for any depressive or anxiety disorder at these time-points ('cases'), respectively. ROC analysis yielded acceptable areas under the curve (AUC) when the ANRQ-R was used to detect current (AUC=0.789-0.798) or predict future (AUC=0.705-0.789) depression or anxiety. Using an example cut-off score of 18 or more, the ANRQ-R correctly classified 72-76% of concurrent 'cases' and 'non-cases' (sensitivity=0.70-0.74, specificity=0.72-0.76) and correctly predicted 74-78% of postnatal 'cases' and 'non-cases' (sensitivity=0.52-0.72, specificity=0.75-0.79). Completion of the ANRQ-R earlier in pregnancy yielded greater positive likelihood ratios for predicting depression or anxiety at 3-months postpartum (cut-off ≥18: second trimester=3.8; third trimester=2.2). CONCLUSION: The ANRQ-R is a structured psychosocial assessment questionnaire that can be scored to provide an overall measure of psychosocial risk. Cut-off scores need not be uniform across settings. Such decisions should be guided by factors including diagnostic prevalence rates, local needs and resource availability.

Why do some pregnant women not fully disclose at comprehensive psychosocial assessment with their midwife?

PROBLEM: While comprehensive psychosocial assessment is recommended as part of routine maternity care, unless women engage and disclose, psychosocial risk will not be identified or referred in a timely manner. We need to better understand and where possible overcome the barriers to disclosure if we are to reduce mental health morbidity and complex psychosocial adversity. AIMS: To assess pregnant women's attitude to, and reasons for non-disclosure at, comprehensive psychosocial assessment with their midwife. METHODS: Data from 1796 pregnant women were analysed using a mixed method approach. After ascertaining women's comfort with, attitude to, and non-disclosure at psychosocial screening, thematic analysis was used to understand the reasons underpinning non-disclosure. FINDINGS: 99% of participants were comfortable with the assessment, however 11.1% (N = 193) reported some level of nondisclosure. Key themes for non-disclosure included (1) Normalising and negative self-perception, (2) Fear of negative perceptions from others, (3) Lack of trust of midwife, (4) Differing expectation of appointment and (5) Mode of assessment and time issues. DISCUSSION: Factors associated with high comfort and disclosure levels in this sample include an experienced and skilled midwifery workforce at the study site and a relatively advantaged and mental health literate sample. Proper implementation of psychosocial assessment policy; setting clear expectations for women and, for more vulnerable women, extending assessment time, modifying mode of assessment, and offering continuity of midwifery care will help build rapport, improve disclosure, and increase the chance of early identification and intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This study informs approaches to improving comprehensive psychosocial assessment in the maternity setting.

Screening for anxiety disorders in third trimester pregnancy: a comparison of four brief measures.

Evidence regarding the accuracy of existing anxiety screeners used in pregnancy is limited. This study compares the psychometric characteristics of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2- and 7-item Scales (GAD-2 and GAD-7), the anxiety subscale of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS-3A) and the two anxiety items of the Antenatal Risk Questionnaire (ANRQ-2A). Nine hundred fifty-four women completed the screening measures and anxiety modules of a diagnostic reference standard (SAGE-SR) in the third trimester. Test performance characteristics of each measure was assessed using Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analysis. We applied four previously recommended criteria to ascertain the value of each measure for widespread clinical use: area under the curve (AUC ≥ 0.8, Youden's index ≥ 0.5, negative predictive value (NPV) ≥ 0.8 and positive likelihood ratio (LR +) ≥ 4.0). Prevalence for any SAGE-SR anxiety disorder was 3%. All measures yielded an acceptable AUC of ≥ 0.8, Youden's index of ≥ 0.5 and NPV of ≥ 0.8. Only the EPDS-3A, at a cut-point ≥ 5, also achieved a LR + of ≥ 4.0 (4.35) but at this cut-point sensitivity was less than 0.75. The ANRQ-2A, at its optimal cut-point of ≥ 6, was the only measure to additionally attain both a sensitivity and specificity of ≥ .75. This study expands the evidence base for brief anxiety screening measures in the maternity setting and provides empirical support for the use of the EPDS-3A and ANRQ-2A in routine screening programmes. Studies assessing the performance of these measures in samples with higher disease prevalence and broader socio-economic status are warranted.