Can we identify the prevalence of perinatal mental health using routinely collected health data?: A review of publicly available perinatal mental health data sources in England.

Introduction: Perinatal mental health (PMH) conditions affect around one in four women, and may be even higher in women from some ethnic minority groups and those living in low socioeconomic circumstances. Poor PMH causes significant distress and can have lifelong adverse impacts for some children. In England, current prevalence rates are estimated using mental health data of the general population and do not take sociodemographic variance of geographical areas into account. Services cannot plan their capacity and ensure appropriate and timely support using these estimates. Our aim was to see if PMH prevalence rates could be identified using existing publicly available sources of routine health data. Methods: A review of data sources was completed by searching NHS Digital (now NHS England), Public Health England and other national PMH resources, performing keyword searches online, and research team knowledge of the field. The sources were screened for routine data that could be used to produce prevalence of PMH conditions by sociodemographic variation. Included sources were reviewed for their utility in accessibility, data relevance and technical specification relating to PMH and sociodemographic data items. Results: We found a PMH data 'blind spot' with significant inadequacies in the utility of all identified data sources, making it impossible to provide information on the prevalence of PMH in England and understand variation by sociodemographic differences. Conclusions: To enhance the utility of publicly available routine data to provide PMH prevalence rates requires improved mandatory PMH data capture in universal services, available publicly via one platform and including assessment outcomes and sociodemographic data.

Effectiveness of a midwife-led continuity of care model on birth outcomes and maternal mental health in vulnerable women: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot, process evaluation and economic analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Women from social disadvantage are at greater risk of poor birth outcomes. The midwife-led continuity of care (MCC) model, which offers flexible and relational care from a small team of midwives, has demonstrated improved birth outcomes. In the general population, the impact of MCC on socially disadvantaged women and on birth outcomes is still unclear. This protocol describes a pragmatic evaluation of the MCC model in a socially disadvantaged population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An open-labelled individual prospective randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot, process evaluation and economic analysis, from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2024.Women will be randomly allocated to MCC or standard care as part of usual midwifery practice. Participants and midwives will not be blinded, but researchers will be. An internal pilot will test the feasibility of this process.Participants are those randomised into MCC or standard care, who consent to participate in one of two Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohort studies. Outcomes are taken from routinely linked health data, supplemented by additional data capture. The sample size is fixed by the capacity of MCC teams, commissioning duration and numbers recruited into the cohort. The estimated maximum fixed sample size is 1,410 pregnancies (minimum 734).Intention to treat (ITT) analysis will be undertaken to assess the impact of MCC on two independent primary outcomes. An economic evaluation will explore the impact on health resource use and a process evaluation will explore fidelity to the MCC model, and barriers/facilitators to implementation from midwives' and women's perspectives. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained for the randomisation in midwifery practice, use of the cohort data for evaluation and for the process evaluation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and translated into policy briefings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: IsRCTNhttps://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN31836167.

Risk factors for early language delay in children within a minority ethnic, bilingual, deprived environment (Born in Bradford's Better Start): a UK community birth cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Preschool language skills and language delay predict academic and socioemotional outcomes. Children from deprived environments are at a higher risk of language delay, and both minority ethnic and bilingual children can experience a gap in language skills at school entry. However, research that examines late talking (preschool language delay) in an ethnically diverse, bilingual, deprived environment at age 2 is scarce. METHODS: Data from Born in Bradford's Better Start birth cohort were used to identify rates of late talking (≤10th percentile on the Oxford-Communicative Development Inventory: Short) in 2-year-old children within an ethnically diverse, predominantly bilingual, deprived UK region (N=712). The relations between known demographic, maternal, distal and proximal child risk factors, and language skills and language delay were tested using hierarchical linear and logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 24.86% of children were classified as late talkers. Maternal demographic factors (ethnicity, born in UK, education, financial security, employment, household size, age) predicted 3.12% of the variance in children's expressive vocabulary. Adding maternal language factors (maternal native language, home languages) and perinatal factors (birth weight, gestation) to the model predicted 3.76% of the variance. Adding distal child factors (child sex, child age) predicted 11.06%, and adding proximal child factors (receptive vocabulary, hearing concerns) predicted 49.51%. Significant risk factors for late talking were male sex (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.09), receptive vocabulary delay (OR 8.40, 95% CI 4.99 to 14.11) and parent-reported hearing concerns (OR 7.85, 95% CI 1.90 to 32.47). Protective factors were increased household size (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.95) and age (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Almost one in four children living in an ethnically diverse and deprived UK area have early language delay. Demographic factors explained little variance in early vocabulary, whereas proximal child factors held more predictive value. The results indicate further research on early language delay is warranted for vulnerable groups.

Psychological Distress Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Adults in the United Kingdom Based on Coordinated Analyses of 11 Longitudinal Studies.

Importance: How population mental health has evolved across the COVID-19 pandemic under varied lockdown measures is poorly understood, and the consequences for health inequalities are unclear. Objective: To investigate changes in mental health and sociodemographic inequalities from before and across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in 11 longitudinal studies. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included adult participants from 11 UK longitudinal population-based studies with prepandemic measures of psychological distress. Analyses were coordinated across these studies, and estimates were pooled. Data were collected from 2006 to 2021. Exposures: Trends in the prevalence of poor mental health were assessed in the prepandemic period (time period 0 [TP 0]) and at 3 pandemic TPs: 1, initial lockdown (March to June 2020); 2, easing of restrictions (July to October 2020); and 3, a subsequent lockdown (November 2020 to March 2021). Analyses were stratified by sex, race and ethnicity, education, age, and UK country. Main Outcomes and Measures: Multilevel regression was used to examine changes in psychological distress from the prepandemic period across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological distress was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire, the Kessler 6, the 9-item Malaise Inventory, the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire, the 8-item or 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Centre for Epidemiological Studies-Depression across different studies. Results: In total, 49 993 adult participants (12 323 [24.6%] aged 55-64 years; 32 741 [61.2%] women; 4960 [8.7%] racial and ethnic minority) were analyzed. Across the 11 studies, mental health deteriorated from prepandemic scores across all 3 pandemic periods, but there was considerable heterogeneity across the study-specific estimated effect sizes (pooled estimate for TP 1: standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.15; 95% CI, 0.06-0.25; TP 2: SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.27; TP 3: SMD, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.32). Changes in psychological distress across the pandemic were higher in women (TP 3: SMD, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11, 0.35) than men (TP 3: SMD, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.26) and lower in individuals with below-degree level education at TP 3 (SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.30) compared with those who held degrees (SMD, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.38). Increased psychological distress was most prominent among adults aged 25 to 34 years (SMD, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.14-0.84) and 35 to 44 years (SMD, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.10-0.60) compared with other age groups. No evidence of changes in distress differing by race and ethnicity or UK country were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the substantial deterioration in mental health seen in the UK during the first lockdown did not reverse when lockdown lifted, and a sustained worsening was observed across the pandemic period. Mental health declines have been unequal across the population, with women, those with higher degrees, and those aged 25 to 44 years more affected than other groups.

'When will this end? Will it end?' The impact of the March-June 2020 UK COVID-19 lockdown response on mental health: a longitudinal survey of mothers in the Born in Bradford study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore clinically important increases in depression/anxiety from before to during the first UK COVID-19 lockdown and factors related to this change, with a particular focus on ethnic differences. DESIGN: Pre-COVID-19 and lockdown surveys nested within two longitudinal Born in Bradford cohort studies. PARTICIPANTS: 1860 mothers with a child aged 0-5 or 9-13, 48% Pakistani heritage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ORs for a clinically important increase (5 points or more) in depression (eight item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8)) and anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7)) in unadjusted regression analyses, repeated with exposures of interest separated by ethnicity to look for differences in magnitude of associations, and lived experience of mothers captured in open text questions. RESULTS: The number of women reporting clinically important depression/anxiety increased from 11% to 20% (95% CI 10%-13%; 18%-22%) and from 10% to 16% (95% CI 8%-11%; 15%-18%), respectively. Increases in depression/anxiety were associated with loneliness (OR=8.37, 95% CI 5.70 to 12.27; 8.50, 95% CI 5.71 to 12.65, respectively); financial (6.23, 95% CI 3.96 to 9.80; 6.03, 95% CI 3.82 to 9.51), food (3.33, 95% CI 2.09 to 5.28; 3.46, 95% CI 2.15 to 5.58) and housing insecurity (3.29, 95% CI 2.36 to 4.58; 3.0, 95% CI 2.11 to 4.25); a lack of physical activity (3.13, 95% CI 2.15 to 4.56; 2.55, 95% CI 1.72 to 3.78); and a poor partner relationship (3.6, 95% CI 2.44 to 5.43; 5.1, 95% CI 3.37 to 7.62). The magnitude of associations between key exposures and worsening mental health varied between ethnic groups.Responses to open text questions illustrated a complex interplay of challenges contributing to mental ill health including: acute health anxieties; the mental load of managing multiple responsibilities; loss of social support and coping strategies; pressures of financial and employment insecurity; and being unable to switch off from the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Mental ill health has worsened for many during the COVID-19 lockdown, particularly in those who are lonely and economically insecure. The magnitude of associations between key exposures and worsening mental health varied between ethnic groups. Mental health problems may have longer term consequences for public health and interventions that address the potential causes are needed.

Addressing inequalities in the identification and management of perinatal mental health difficulties: The perspectives of minoritised women, healthcare practitioners and the voluntary sector.

Background: Perinatal mental health (PMH) difficulties affect approximately one in five birthing women. If not identified and managed appropriately, these PMH difficulties can carry impacts across generations, affecting mental health and relationship outcomes. There are known inequalities in identification and management across the healthcare pathway. Whilst barriers and facilitators have been identified there is a lack of clarity about how these relate to the avoidable and unfair inequalities experienced by various groups of women. Further research is required to understand how to address inequalities in PMH. Aim: To understand the key factors that enable and hinder access to PMH care for women from minoritised groups across the PMH care pathway, and how these have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A sequential mixed-methods approach gathered views and experiences from stakeholders in one region in northern England. This included an online survey with 145 NHS healthcare practitioners and semi-structured interviews with 19 women from ethnic minority and/or socio-economically deprived backgrounds who had experienced PMH difficulties, and 12 key informants from the voluntary and community sector workforce. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and framework analysis was applied to qualitative data. Findings: Barriers and facilitators were mapped using a socio-technical framework to understand the role of (i) processes, (ii) people (organised as women, practitioners and others), (iii) technology, and (iv) the system as a whole in deepening or alleviating inequalities. Influences that were identified as pertinent to inequalities in identification and management included provision of interpreters, digital exclusion, stigma, disempowerment, distrust of services, practitioner attitudes, data capture, representation in the workforce, narrow rules of engagement and partnership working. Stakeholder groups expressed that several barriers were further compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussion: The findings highlight the need for change at the system level to tackle inequalities across the PMH care pathway. Four inter-connected recommendations were developed to enable this systems change: building emotional safety between professionals and women; making PMH a part of core healthcare business; increasing cultural competency specific to PMH; and enhanced partnership working.

Born in Bradford's Better Start (BiBBS) interventional birth cohort study: Interim cohort profile.

Background: The Born in Bradford's Better Start (BiBBS) interventional birth cohort study was designed as an innovative cohort platform for efficient evaluation of early life interventions delivered through the Better Start Bradford programme. There are a growing number of interventional cohorts being implemented internationally. This paper provides an interim analysis of BiBBS in order to share learning about the feasibility and value of this method. Methods: Recruitment began in January 2016 and will complete in December 2023 with a target sample of 5,000 pregnancies. An interim analysis was completed for all pregnancies recruited between January 2016 and November 2019 with an expected due date between 1 st April 2016 and 8 th March 2020. Descriptive statistics were completed on the data. Results: Of 4,823 eligible pregnancies, 2,626 (54%) pregnancies were recruited, resulting in 2,392 mothers and 2,501 children. The sample are representative of the pregnant population (61% Pakistani heritage; 12% White British; 8% other South Asian and 6% Central and Eastern European ethnicity). The majority of participants (84%) live in the lowest decile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation, and many live in vulnerable circumstances. A high proportion (85%) of BiBBS families have engaged in one or more of the Better Start Bradford interventions. Levels of participation varied by the characteristics of the interventions, such as the requirement for active participation and the length of commitment to a programme. Conclusions: We have demonstrated the feasibility of recruiting an interventional cohort that includes seldom heard families from ethnic minority and deprived backgrounds. The high level of uptake of interventions is encouraging for the goal of evaluating the process and outcomes of multiple early life interventions using the innovative interventional cohort approach. BiBBS covers a period before, during and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic which adds scientific value to the cohort.

Assessing and predicting adolescent and early adulthood common mental disorders using electronic primary care data: analysis of a prospective cohort study (ALSPAC) in Southwest England.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine agreement between common mental disorders (CMDs) from primary care records and repeated CMD questionnaire data from ALSPAC (the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children) over adolescence and young adulthood, explore factors affecting CMD identification in primary care records, and construct models predicting ALSPAC-derived CMDs using only primary care data. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective cohort study (ALSPAC) in Southwest England with linkage to electronic primary care records. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care records were extracted for 11 807 participants (80% of 14 731 eligible). Between 31% (3633; age 15/16) and 11% (1298; age 21/22) of participants had both primary care and ALSPAC CMD data. OUTCOME MEASURES: ALSPAC outcome measures were diagnoses of suspected depression and/or CMDs. Primary care outcome measure were Read codes for diagnosis, symptoms and treatment of depression/CMDs. For each time point, sensitivities and specificities for primary care CMD diagnoses were calculated for predicting ALSPAC-derived measures of CMDs, and the factors associated with identification of primary care-based CMDs in those with suspected ALSPAC-derived CMDs explored. Lasso (least absolute selection and shrinkage operator) models were used at each time point to predict ALSPAC-derived CMDs using only primary care data, with internal validation by randomly splitting data into 60% training and 40% validation samples. RESULTS: Sensitivities for primary care diagnoses were low for CMDs (range: 3.5%-19.1%) and depression (range: 1.6%-34.0%), while specificities were high (nearly all >95%). The strongest predictors of identification in the primary care data for those with ALSPAC-derived CMDs were symptom severity indices. The lasso models had relatively low prediction rates, especially in the validation sample (deviance ratio range: -1.3 to 12.6%), but improved with age. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care data underestimate CMDs compared to population-based studies. Improving general practitioner identification, and using free-text or secondary care data, is needed to improve the accuracy of models using clinical data.

Experiences of lockdown during the Covid-19 pandemic: descriptive findings from a survey of families in the Born in Bradford study.

Background: Lockdown measures implemented to contain the Covid-19 virus may be increasing health inequalities, with families from deprived and ethnically diverse backgrounds most likely to be adversely affected. This paper presents findings of the experiences of the Covid-19 lockdown on families living in the multi-ethnic and deprived city of Bradford, England. Methods: Questionnaire surveys were sent during the Covid-19 UK lockdown (10th April to 30 th June 2020) to parents in two prospective birth cohort studies. Cross tabulations explored variation by ethnicity and employment status. Text from open questions were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Of 7,652 families invited, 2,144 (28%) participated. Ethnicity of respondents was: 957 (47%) Pakistani heritage, 715 (35%) White British and 356 (18%) other. 971 (46%) live in the most deprived decile of material deprivation in England. 2,043 (95%) were mothers and 101 were partners. The results summarised below are based on the mothers' responses. Many families live in poor quality (N=574, 28%), and overcrowded (N=364, 19%) housing; this was more common in families of Pakistani heritage and other ethnicities. Financial (N=738 (37%), food (N=396, 20%), employment (N=728, 37%) and housing (N=204, 10%) insecurities were common, particularly in those who were furloughed, self-employed not working or unemployed. Clinically significant depression and anxiety symptoms were reported by 372 (19%) and 318 (16%) of the mothers and were more common in White British mothers and those with economic insecurity. Open text responses corroborated these findings and highlighted high levels of anxiety about becoming ill or dying from Covid-19. Conclusions: The experiences of the Covid-19 lockdown in this ethnically diverse and deprived population highlight a large number of families living in poor housing conditions, suffering from economic insecurity and poor mental health. There is a need for policy makers and commissioners to better support these families.

Implementation evaluation of multiple complex early years interventions: an evaluation framework and study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation evaluations are integral to understanding whether, how and why interventions work. However, unpicking the mechanisms of complex interventions is often challenging in usual service settings where multiple services are delivered concurrently. Furthermore, many locally developed and/or adapted interventions have not undergone any evaluation, thus limiting the evidence base available. Born in Bradford's Better Start cohort is evaluating the impact of multiple early life interventions being delivered as part of the Big Lottery Fund's 'A Better Start' programme to improve the health and well-being of children living in one of the most socially and ethnically diverse areas of the UK. In this paper, we outline our evaluation framework and protocol for embedding pragmatic implementation evaluation across multiple early years interventions and services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The evaluation framework is based on a modified version of The Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity. Using qualitative and quantitative methods, our evaluation framework incorporates semistructured interviews, focus groups, routinely collected data and questionnaires. We will explore factors related to content, delivery and reach of interventions at both individual and wider community levels. Potential moderating factors impacting intervention success such as participants' satisfaction, strategies to facilitate implementation, quality of delivery and context will also be examined. Interview and focus guides will be based on the Theoretical Domains Framework to further explore the barriers and facilitators of implementation. Descriptive statistics will be employed to analyse the routinely collected quantitative data and thematic analysis will be used to analyse qualitative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Health Research Authority (HRA) has confirmed our implementation evaluations do not require review by an NHS Research Ethics Committee (HRA decision 60/88/81). Findings will be shared widely to aid commissioning decisions and will also be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, summary reports, conferences and community newsletters.

Integrating research and system-wide practice in public health: lessons learnt from Better Start Bradford.

Many interventions that are delivered within public health services have little evidence of effect. Evaluating interventions that are being delivered as a part of usual practice offers opportunities to improve the evidence base of public health. However, such evaluation is challenging and requires the integration of research into system-wide practice. The Born in Bradford's Better Start experimental birth cohort offers an opportunity to efficiently evaluate multiple complex community interventions to improve the health, wellbeing and development of children aged 0-3 years. Based on the learning from this programme, this paper offers a pragmatic and practical guide to researchers, public health commissioners and service providers to enable them to integrate research into their everyday practice, thus enabling relevant and robust evaluations within a complex and changing system.Using the principles of co-production the key challenges of integrating research and practice were identified, and appropriate strategies to overcome these, developed across five key stages: 1) Community and stakeholder engagement; 2) Intervention design; 3) Optimising routinely collected data; 4) Monitoring implementation; and 5) Evaluation. As a result of our learning we have developed comprehensive toolkits ( https://borninbradford.nhs.uk/what-we-do/pregnancy-early-years/toolkit/ ) including: an operational guide through the service design process; an implementation and monitoring guide; and an evaluation framework. The evaluation framework incorporates implementation evaluations to enable understanding of intervention performance in practice, and quasi experimental approaches to infer causal effects in a timely manner. We also offer strategies to harness routinely collected data to enhance the efficiency and affordability of evaluations that are directly relevant to policy and practice.These strategies and tools will help researchers, commissioners and service providers to work together to evaluate interventions delivered in real-life settings. More importantly, however, we hope that they will support the development of a connected system that empowers practitioners and commissioners to embed innovation and improvement into their own practice, thus enabling them to learn, evaluate and improve their own services.

South Asian ethnicity is associated with a lower prevalence of atrial fibrillation despite greater prevalence of established risk factors: a population-based study in Bradford Metropolitan District.

AIMS: Previous studies indicate that South Asians (SAs) may have a reduced risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF) despite having a higher prevalence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors. This observational study was designed to explore the relative differences between SAs and Whites in a well-defined, multi-ethnic population with careful consideration of traditional cardiovascular risk factors that are thought to contribute to the development of AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Anonymized data from 417 575 adults were sourced from primary care records within Bradford Metropolitan District, UK. Atrial fibrillation diagnosis was indicated by the presence on the AF Quality Outcomes Framework register. Self-reported ethnicity was mapped to census ethnic codes. The age-standardized prevalence rates of AF were calculated for comparison between the White and SA populations; our study sample presented relative proportions of 2.39 and 0.4%. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the odds of developing AF given SA ethnicity. Adjustment for age, sex, and established risk factors found a 71% reduction in odds of AF in SAs when compared with Whites [odds ratio (OR): 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.26-0.32]. When stratified by ethnicity, analyses revealed significantly different odds of AF for patients with diabetes; diabetes was not associated with the development of AF in the SA population (0.81, 95% CI: 0.63-1.05). CONCLUSION: This study, in a multi-ethnic population, presents ethnicity as a predictor of AF in which prevalence is significantly lower in SAs when compared with Whites. This is despite SAs having a higher frequency of established risk factors for the development of AF, such as ischaemic heart disease, heart failure, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes. These findings are consistent with previous literature and add weight to the need for further investigation, although this is the first study to investigate the differential associations of individual risk factors with development of AF.

Electrocardiogram interpretation and arrhythmia management: a primary and secondary care survey.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing desire among service commissioners to treat arrhythmia in primary care. Accurate interpretation of the electrocardiogram (ECG) is fundamental to this. ECG interpretation has previously been shown to vary widely but there is little recent data. AIM: To examine the interpretation of ECGs in primary and secondary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional survey of participants' interpretation of six ECGs and hypothetical management of patients based on those ECGs, at primary care educational events, and a cardiology department in Leeds. METHOD: A total of 262 primary care clinicians and 20 cardiology clinicians were surveyed via questionnaire. Answers were compared with expert electrophysiologist opinion. RESULTS: In primary care, abnormal ECGs were interpreted as normal by 23% of responders. ST elevation and prolonged QT were incorrectly interpreted as normal by 1% and 22%, respectively. In cardiology, abnormal ECGs were interpreted as normal by 3%. CONCLUSION: ECG provision and interpretation remains inconsistent in both primary and secondary care. Primary care practitioners are less experienced and less confident with ECG interpretation than cardiologists, and require support in this area.