Association of Adverse Childhood Experiences and Resilience With Depression and Anxiety During Pregnancy.

This was a retrospective cohort study of pregnant individuals in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California system who were screened for adverse childhood experiences and resilience as part of standard prenatal care at about 16 weeks of gestation. Overall, 14,625 pregnancies were included; 17.0% had newly identified depression; 9.8% had newly identified depression symptoms; and 8.9% had newly identified anxiety during the pregnancy with no known preexisting diagnosis. We found that adverse childhood experiences and low resilience were independently associated with newly identified depressive disorders, depression symptoms, and anxiety disorders during pregnancy. When adverse childhood experiences and resilience were modeled in combination, the greatest odds of each outcome occurred in individuals with a combination of four or more adverse childhood experiences and low resilience (vs no adverse childhood experiences and high resilience): depression adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 6.43 (95% CI, 5.23-7.90), depression symptoms aOR 9.49 (95% CI, 7.50-12.0), and anxiety disorder aOR 4.79 (95% CI, 3.81-6.02). Routine screening for adverse childhood experiences and resilience may identify individuals at risk of developing prenatal depression and anxiety, allowing faster resource linkage and potentially improved maternal and child outcomes.

Implementation and Evaluation of Adverse Childhood Experiences Screening in Pediatrics and Obstetrics Settings.

BACKGROUND: Screening for adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) in prenatal and pediatric populations is recommended by the California ACEs Aware initiative and is a promising practice to interrupt ACEs in children and mitigate ACEs-related health complications in children and families. Yet, integrating ACEs screening into clinical practice poses several challenges. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this report was to evaluate the Kaiser Permanente Northern California and Kaiser Permanente Southern California pilots and implementation of ACEs screening into routine prenatal (Kaiser Permanente Northern California) and pediatric (Kaiser Permanente Southern California) care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: These pilots were evaluated and compared to identify common challenges to implementation and offer promising practices for negotiating these challenges. Evaluation methods included feedback from staff, clinicians, and patients, as well as comparisons of methods to overcome various barriers to screening implementation. RESULTS: Implementing ACEs screening, like implementation of any new component of clinical care, takes careful planning, education, creation of content and workflows, and continuous integration of feedback from both patients and staff. CONCLUSION: This evaluation can serve as support for care teams who are considering implementing ACEs screening or who are already screening for ACEs. More research is needed regarding the relationship between ACEs and preventable and treatable health outcomes to improve health for patients and their families.