Worrying in the wings? Negative emotional birth memories in mothers and fathers show similar associations with perinatal mood disturbance and delivery mode.

Negative birth experiences can lead to symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder in new mothers but have received much less attention in new fathers. A sample of 314 first-time expectant couples rated their symptoms of anxiety and depression in the third trimester and at 4-month post birth (227 vaginal delivery, 87 caesarean section), when they also completed the emotional memories subscale of the BirthMARQ (Foley et al. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 14, 211, 2014). We first examined mode of delivery (vaginal birth versus caesarean section) as a predictor of mothers' and fathers' BirthMARQ scores. Next, we used actor-partner interdependence model (APIM) to investigate intra- and interpersonal associations between birth experiences and maternal/paternal latent factors for antenatal and postnatal depression/anxiety. Reports of negative birth experiences were more common for mothers than fathers and for parents of babies born by caesarean section than by vaginal delivery. Within-couple agreement was moderately strong and, for both parents at both time-points, individual differences in negative birth memories were associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety. Negative birth memories also played a mediating role in the association between birth via caesarean section and reduced postnatal maternal wellbeing. Given the striking similarities between mothers and fathers in links between birth experiences and wellbeing, our findings highlight the need for partner-inclusive intervention strategies.

Effectiveness of developmental screening in an urban setting.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of developmental screening on the identification of developmental delays, early intervention (EI) referrals, and EI eligibility. METHODS: This randomized controlled, parallel-group trial was conducted from December 2008 to June 2010 in 4 urban pediatric practices. Children were eligible if they were <30 months old, term, without congenital malformations or genetic syndromes, not in foster care, and not enrolled in EI. Children were randomized to receive 1 of the following: (1) developmental screening using Ages and Stages Questionnaire-II (ASQ-II and Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT) with office staff assistance, (2) developmental screening using ASQ-II and M-CHAT without office staff assistance, or (3) developmental surveillance using age-appropriate milestones at well visits. Outcomes were assessed using an intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2103 children were enrolled. Most were African-American with family incomes less than $30,000. Children in either screening arm were more likely to be identified with delays (23.0% and 26.8% vs 13.0%; P < .001), referred to EI (19.9% and 17.5% vs 10.2%; P < .001), and eligible for EI services (7.0% and 5.3% vs 3.0%; P < .001) than children in the surveillance arm. Children in the screening arms incurred a shorter time to identification, EI referral, and EI evaluation than children in the surveillance arm. CONCLUSIONS: Children who participated in a developmental screening program were more likely to be identified with developmental delays, referred to EI, and eligible for EI services in a timelier fashion than children who received surveillance alone. These results support policies endorsing developmental screening.