Towards effective screening for paternal perinatal mental illness: a meta-review of instruments and research gaps.

anxiety depression fathers paternal mental health paternal perinatal depression perinatal screening instruments

Journal

Frontiers in public health
ISSN: 2296-2565
Titre abrégé: Front Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101616579

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2024
Historique:
received: 29 02 2024
accepted: 04 06 2024
medline: 10 7 2024
pubmed: 10 7 2024
entrez: 10 7 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Paternal perinatal mental illness (PPMI), which affects around one in 10 fathers, is under-recognised despite increasing awareness of men's mental health in the perinatal period. Social stigma and men's reluctance to seek help exacerbate this gap. Neglecting the mental health needs of new fathers not only puts them at increased risk for mental illness themselves, but also has a profound and long-lasting impact on their families, children and their own self-esteem as they navigate their new role in the family dynamic. This meta-review systematically identifies instruments assessing PPMI symptoms, evaluates their psychometric properties and applicability, presents key findings from studies using these tools, and identifies gaps and limitations in the literature on PPMI symptom assessment. A systematic literature review was conducted using search strategies applied to PubMed, PsycNet APA, Cochrane, and Web of Science, supplemented by hand searches. Relevant information was extracted from each included study. Extracted data were analysed narratively to address the research questions. Findings identified limitations and gaps in current screening practices. While the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is the most widely used screening tool for both fathers and mothers, it inadequately captures atypical depressive symptoms in men. Cutoff scores lack consensus, and instrument sensitivity varies significantly due to cultural and sociodemographic factors. A number of other screening tools have been identified, most of which are more general and not specifically designed for perinatal mental health. This meta-review broadens perspectives on PPMI screening instruments, highlighting key themes, patterns, and differences across the included reviews. While a variety of screening tools are used, the review underscores the necessity for tools specifically tailored to fathers during the perinatal period.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Paternal perinatal mental illness (PPMI), which affects around one in 10 fathers, is under-recognised despite increasing awareness of men's mental health in the perinatal period. Social stigma and men's reluctance to seek help exacerbate this gap. Neglecting the mental health needs of new fathers not only puts them at increased risk for mental illness themselves, but also has a profound and long-lasting impact on their families, children and their own self-esteem as they navigate their new role in the family dynamic.
Objective UNASSIGNED
This meta-review systematically identifies instruments assessing PPMI symptoms, evaluates their psychometric properties and applicability, presents key findings from studies using these tools, and identifies gaps and limitations in the literature on PPMI symptom assessment.
Methods UNASSIGNED
A systematic literature review was conducted using search strategies applied to PubMed, PsycNet APA, Cochrane, and Web of Science, supplemented by hand searches. Relevant information was extracted from each included study. Extracted data were analysed narratively to address the research questions.
Results UNASSIGNED
Findings identified limitations and gaps in current screening practices. While the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is the most widely used screening tool for both fathers and mothers, it inadequately captures atypical depressive symptoms in men. Cutoff scores lack consensus, and instrument sensitivity varies significantly due to cultural and sociodemographic factors. A number of other screening tools have been identified, most of which are more general and not specifically designed for perinatal mental health.
Conclusion UNASSIGNED
This meta-review broadens perspectives on PPMI screening instruments, highlighting key themes, patterns, and differences across the included reviews. While a variety of screening tools are used, the review underscores the necessity for tools specifically tailored to fathers during the perinatal period.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38983254
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1393729
pmc: PMC11231099
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Systematic Review Meta-Analysis

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1393729

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Schöch, Hölzle, Lampe, Hörtnagl, Zechmeister-Koss, Buchheim and Paul.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Auteurs

Philipp Schöch (P)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, Division of Psychiatry I, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Department of Clinical Psychology II, Institute of Psychology, University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Laura Hölzle (L)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, Division of Psychiatry I, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Department of Clinical Psychology II, Institute of Psychology, University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Astrid Lampe (A)

Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Rehabilitation Research, Vienna, Austria.

Christine Hörtnagl (C)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, Division of Psychiatry I, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Ingrid Zechmeister-Koss (I)

Austrian Institute for Health Technology Assessment, Vienna, Austria.

Anna Buchheim (A)

Department of Clinical Psychology II, Institute of Psychology, University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Jean Lillian Paul (JL)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, Division of Psychiatry I, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH