Search

Background: Approaches to screening can influence the acceptance of and comfort with mental health screening. Qualitative evidence on pregnant women's comfort with different screening approaches and disclosure of mental health concerns is scant. The purpose of this study was to understand women's perspectives of different mental health screening approaches and the perceived barriers to the communication and disclosure of their mental health concerns during pregnancy.Methods: A qualitative descriptive study was undertaken. Fifteen women, with a singleton pregnancy, were recruited from a community maternity clinic and a mental health clinic in Calgary, Canada. Semi-structured interviews were conducted during both the 2nd and 3rd trimesters. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.Results: Preferences for mental health screening approaches varied. Most women with a known mental health issue preferred a communicative approach, while women without a known mental health history who struggled with emotional problems were inclined towards less interactive approaches and reported a reluctance to share their concerns. Barriers to communicating mental health concerns included a lack of emotional literacy (i.e., not recognizing the symptoms, not understanding the emotions), fear of disclosure outcomes (i.e., fear of being judged, fear of the consequences), feeling uncomfortable to be seen vulnerable, perception about the role of prenatal care provider (internal barriers); the lack of continuity of care, depersonalized care, lack of feedback, and unfamiliarity with/uncertainty about the availability of support (structural barriers).Conclusions: The overlaps between some themes identified for the reasons behind a preferred screening approach and barriers reported by women to communicate mental health concerns suggest that having options may help women overcome some of the current disclosure barriers and enable them to engage in the process. Furthermore, the continuity of care, clarity around the outcomes of disclosing mental health concerns, and availability of immediate support can help women move from providing "the best answer" to providing an authentic answer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors examined the impact of universal screening on the diagnosis of gestational diabetes and its complications. All mothers and newborns registered by the Canadian Institute for Health Information from 1984 to 1996 (even-numbered fiscal years only) were included in the analysis. Over this time period, the proportion of women with gestational diabetes increased ninefold (from 0.3% to 2.7%) while the proportion with prepregnancy diabetes fell from 0.7% to 0.4%. As rates of gestational diabetes increased, a corresponding reduction in the risks of complications (polyhydramnios, amniotic cavity infection, cesarean delivery, and preeclampsia) occurred for women with gestational diabetes. The incidence of gestational diabetes fell in Metro-Hamilton (where screening was discontinued in 1989) but remained high in the rest of Ontario (where screening continued in most areas). No related temporal trends for fetal macrosomia, cesarean delivery, or other diabetes-related complications were observed, regardless of screening policy. The authors concluded that the substantial increase in gestational diabetes in Canada is an artifact caused by universal screening, with no evidence of beneficial effects on pregnancy outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article comments on the study conducted by Shi Wu Wen and colleagues regarding prenatal glucose screening and gestational diabetes among women in Canada. It mentions that the results of this study show that screening for gestational diabetes has no effect on perinatal outcomes. It also provides detailed interpretation and recommendations on the findings of the study. Moreover, it states that the selective screening strategy proposed by the researchers provides exemption only to 10 percent of the population from screening.