Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale (PREPS) and its correlation with anxiety and depression.
Anxiety
COVID-19
Depression
PREPS
Pregnancy
Prenatal stress
Journal
Journal of affective disorders
ISSN: 1573-2517
Titre abrégé: J Affect Disord
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 7906073
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 11 2021
01 11 2021
Historique:
received:
25
02
2021
revised:
21
06
2021
accepted:
28
06
2021
pubmed:
17
7
2021
medline:
3
9
2021
entrez:
16
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In the beginning of 2020, Italy was the first European country to face the COVID-19 outbreak. Restrictions imposed during the pandemic, social isolation, and the cancellation of medical appointments likely resulted in stress that may have affected pregnant women adversely. To determine the psychometric validity of the Italian version of the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale (PREPS) in assessing COVID-19-related stress in pregnant women and to examine correlations between PREPS scales and symptoms of anxiety and depression. 232 pregnant women attending the Obstetric-Gynecologic Clinic of an Academic Hospital were assessed with the PREPS, the Revised Prenatal Distress Questionnaire (NuPDQ), the General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2). We analyzed the internal consistency and factor structure of the PREPS. Convergent validity was examined by comparison with the NuPDQ. PHQ-2 and GAD-7 were used to measure the association with depression and anxiety. Acceptable-to-good internal consistency was found for the three PREPS scales: Preparedness Stress (PS, α=0.760), Prenatal Infection Stress (PIS, α=0.857), and Positive Appraisal (PA, α=0.747). Correlations of the NuPDQ with both PREPS stress scale scores (PS and PIS) were statistically significant, but on multiple regression analysis only the PS scale was correlated with the NuPDQ. Prenatal infection stress predicted GAD-7 score, while Preparedness stress predicted PHQ-2 score. The main limitations were the small sample size and the cross-sectional design of the study. The Italian PREPS exhibited good psychometric properties and associations with clinical symptoms of anxiety and depression.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
In the beginning of 2020, Italy was the first European country to face the COVID-19 outbreak. Restrictions imposed during the pandemic, social isolation, and the cancellation of medical appointments likely resulted in stress that may have affected pregnant women adversely.
AIMS
To determine the psychometric validity of the Italian version of the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale (PREPS) in assessing COVID-19-related stress in pregnant women and to examine correlations between PREPS scales and symptoms of anxiety and depression.
METHODS
232 pregnant women attending the Obstetric-Gynecologic Clinic of an Academic Hospital were assessed with the PREPS, the Revised Prenatal Distress Questionnaire (NuPDQ), the General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2). We analyzed the internal consistency and factor structure of the PREPS. Convergent validity was examined by comparison with the NuPDQ. PHQ-2 and GAD-7 were used to measure the association with depression and anxiety.
RESULTS
Acceptable-to-good internal consistency was found for the three PREPS scales: Preparedness Stress (PS, α=0.760), Prenatal Infection Stress (PIS, α=0.857), and Positive Appraisal (PA, α=0.747). Correlations of the NuPDQ with both PREPS stress scale scores (PS and PIS) were statistically significant, but on multiple regression analysis only the PS scale was correlated with the NuPDQ. Prenatal infection stress predicted GAD-7 score, while Preparedness stress predicted PHQ-2 score.
LIMITATIONS
The main limitations were the small sample size and the cross-sectional design of the study.
CONCLUSION
The Italian PREPS exhibited good psychometric properties and associations with clinical symptoms of anxiety and depression.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34271249
pii: S0165-0327(21)00662-5
doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.06.076
pmc: PMC9757146
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
48-53Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Références
JAMA. 1999 Nov 10;282(18):1737-44
pubmed: 10568646
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 19;17(6):
pubmed: 32204411
Women Birth. 2019 Apr;32(2):99-111
pubmed: 30115515
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jul;223(1):109.e1-109.e16
pubmed: 32360108
Int J Womens Health. 2021 Jul 06;13:653-662
pubmed: 34262355
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Jul;99(7):823-829
pubmed: 32259279
J Behav Med. 2020 Feb;43(1):16-33
pubmed: 31183596
Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7
pubmed: 16717171
Midwifery. 2021 May;96:102940
pubmed: 33601126
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Jul;99(7):817-818
pubmed: 32374420
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 May;2(2):100106
pubmed: 32363335
J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2012 Jun;33(2):62-77
pubmed: 22554138
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Aug;2(3):100155
pubmed: 32838261
BJPsych Open. 2016 Mar 9;2(2):127-138
pubmed: 27703765
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Aug;223(2):293-295
pubmed: 32387321
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Dec;266:113348
pubmed: 32927382
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Aug 14;20(1):466
pubmed: 32799847
Health Psychol. 2008 Sep;27(5):604-15
pubmed: 18823187
Women Birth. 2021 Jul;34(4):335-343
pubmed: 32684343
J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2020 Jul;38(3):223-225
pubmed: 32615801
J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 1999 Mar;20(1):39-52
pubmed: 10212886
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Jan;256:40-45
pubmed: 33166796
Lancet. 2020 Mar 14;395(10227):912-920
pubmed: 32112714
J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2020 Sep;41(3):191-197
pubmed: 32838629
Med Care. 2003 Nov;41(11):1284-92
pubmed: 14583691
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 27;10(4):e0125096
pubmed: 25915929