A Network Analysis of Perinatal Depression, Anxiety, and Temperaments in Women in the First, Second, and Third Trimesters of Pregnancy.

Background/Objectives: Although depression and anxiety are found to be affected by temperaments, little research has studied these relationships in pregnancy. The present study explored the associations among perinatal depression (PD), anxiety dimensions (state, trait, and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD)), and temperaments between women in the three trimesters of pregnancy through a network analysis approach. Moreover, differences in the severity of PD and anxiety between women in the three trimesters were evaluated. Methods: Women in first (N = 31), second (N = 184), and third (N = 54) trimesters of pregnancy were recruited in the present cross-sectional study. The network analysis included PD, anxiety dimensions, and temperaments. Three network models were estimated, and ANOVAs evaluated the differences in the severity of PD and anxiety, including trimesters as a between-subject factor. Results: PD and GAD were the nodes most strongly connected across the three groups. Cyclothymic, depressive, and anxious temperaments were most frequently associated with PD and GAD. Hyperthymic temperament was in the periphery of the three networks. Lastly, women in the first trimester had the highest severity of PD and GAD. Conclusions: PD and GAD showed the strongest associations. Anxiety dimensions had positive associations with PD and GAD, suggesting their role as possible risk factors. Temperaments were differently associated within the network between the three groups. Clinical interventions during pregnancy should target the central variables, considering their direct and indirect relationships.

Is the mental health of couples with twins more at risk? Results from an Italian cohort study.

Introduction: Our retrospective study aimed to investigate whether parents of twins encounter heightened psychological and emotional distress one year after childbirth, in comparison to parents of singletons within an Italian cohort. Methods: Exclusion criteria included multiparity, preterm birth, congenital anomalies, stillbirth, >2 fetus pregnancies, and pre-existing maternal mental health disorders. Out of the 300 couples (600 parents) invited to participate, 286 parents (158 mothers, 128 fathers) successfully completed a self-administered survey. We analyzed three scores separately for mothers and fathers, differentiating between singleton and twin pregnancies: the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) score, the State and Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)-Y1 score, and the STAI-Y2 score. Results: Logistic models were used to assess the influence of age, BMI, marital status, education, and employment on the three binary scores (EPDS, STAI-Y1, and STAI-Y2), revealing no significant differences in absolute scores between parents of singletons and twins. Paired analysis revealed significantly higher EPDS (mean increase: 3.8, SD: 6.5), STAI-Y1 (mean increase: 5.4, SD: 12.5), and STAI-Y2 (mean increase: 4.5, SD: 12.4) scores for mothers (p < 0.0001). Approximately 10% of women and 8% of men reported suicidal thoughts. Discussion: Contrary to expectations, no substantial psychological differences emerged between parents of twins and singletons. Adjusting for confounders through univariate analysis maintained nonsignificant trends. Nevertheless, caution in interpretation is warranted due to strict inclusion criteria favoring twin pregnancies with better outcomes. Unintended bias could have resulted from routine psychological support offered to mothers of twins in our clinic. This presents an important framework for future research, including randomized controlled trials comparing parents of multiples with psychological support to those without.Finally, the elevated prevalence of depression symptoms and suicidal thoughts in our cohort underscores the importance of mental health during pregnancy and early parenting. We advocate for the screening of parents for postpartum depression and various psychological conditions, encompassing a spectrum of anxiety disorders. Those at elevated risk of mental distress should be proactively offered appropriate support.

Pregnancy-related psychopathology: A comparison between pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19-related social restriction periods.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted in a still undefined way pregnant women's mental health. There are reports of mood and affect changes in the general population and the suggestion that similar changes occur also in the pregnant population. The greater vulnerability of women during the COVID-19 restriction period may translate into a greater risk for mental disorders in the gestational period. We hypothesised that pregnant women in the pre-pandemic period would have less psychopathology and more psychological support than pregnant women during the pandemic restriction period. AIM: To compare pregnant women for anxiety, prenatal depression, psychopathology, and social support before and after the awareness of the pandemic. METHODS: We administered to women willing to participate in their 2nd-3rd trimesters of pregnancy the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Form Y (STAI-Y), and the Symptom CheckList-90-Revised (SCL-90R); we further collected sociodemographic variables and explored women's social support. The comparison was cross-sectional. The first sample was termed nonCOVID-19 because data were gathered before the COVID-19 outbreak (January 2020-February 2020) was declared, and the second sample termed COVID-19 because participants were already subjected to the COVID-19-related restrictive measures (January 2021-February 2021). Since normal distribution was not met (Shapiro-Wilk test applied), we applied nonparametric Mann-Whitney's U-test to compare psychometric tests. Ethical standards were met. RESULTS: The nonCOVID-19 group reported higher support from partners only, while the COVID-19 group reported multiple support (χ 2 = 9.7181; P = 0.021); the nonCOVID-19 group scored higher than the COVID-19 group only on state anxiety among psychometric scales [STAI-Y1, nonCOVID-19 median = 39 (95%CI: 39.19-51.10) vs COVID-19 median= 32 (95%CI: 30.83-38.90); Mann-Whitney's U=117.5, P = 0.00596]. Other measures did not differ meaningfully between the two groups. Scores on the EPDS, the state and trait subscales of the STAI-Y, and most SCL-90R subscales inter-correlated with one another. The anxiety component of the EPDS, EPDS-3A, correlated poorly with other measures, while it was the Global Symptom Index of the SCL-90-R that correlated most strongly with most measures. Our results are at odds with most literature and do not confirm increased depression and anxiety rates in pregnant women during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The ability of pregnant women to deal with novel generalised threats involves mobilization of inner resources. Increasing sources of social support may have produced anxiolysis in the COVID-19 sample.