18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A prospective study of maternal postnatal depressive symptoms with infant-feeding practices in a Chinese birth cohort

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The first few weeks after childbirth are critical, as women may encounter lactation problems and postpartum depression during this period. However, it is still unclear whether early breastfeeding behaviours are related to the symptoms of postnatal depression (PND) in Chinese populations. Therefore, the current study aimed to investigate the association between symptoms of PND and infant feeding practices based on a large-scale Chinese cohort.

          Methods

          A prospective study of the community-based cohort was conducted from January 2015 to December 2016. Infant feeding outcomes, including exclusive/partial breastfeeding and formula feeding, were assessed according to the WHO guidelines. Symptoms of PND were assessed by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale at 4 weeks postpartum. Multivariate generalized estimating equation models were applied to investigate the associations between depressive symptoms and infant feeding behaviours.

          Results

          A total of 956 mother-infant pairs were included. Fifty-six mothers presented screen-positive symptoms of PND with a cut-off ≥10. The percentage of early breastfeeding initiation was 75.8%, while the average duration of exclusive breastfeeding was 3.90 ± 2.33 months. Postnatal depressive symptoms were associated with a shorter breastfeeding duration (8.02 vs. 6.32 months, P < 0.05) and earlier formula introduction (4.98 vs. 3.60 months, P < 0.05). After adjustments were made for covariates, postnatal depressive symptoms were associated with an increased risk of the discontinuation of exclusive and partial breastfeeding ( β = − 0.049, P = 0.047 and β = − 0.082, P = 0.006, respectively). Compared to mothers without symptoms of PND, mothers with depressive symptoms were more likely to supplement formula for their infants in the first year of life ( β =0.074, P = 0.016). These associations were still significant in the sensitivity analyses, using an EPDS cut-off of ≥13.

          Conclusions

          Our findings indicate that depressive symptoms at 4 weeks postpartum are associated with the cessation of exclusive and partial breastfeeding duration and the introduction of formula in the 12 months of delivery. Early psychosocial assessment and social support should be offered to mothers in the early postpartum period to indirectly prevent adverse breastfeeding outcomes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Onset timing, thoughts of self-harm, and diagnoses in postpartum women with screen-positive depression findings.

          The period prevalence of depression among women is 21.9% during the first postpartum year; however, questions remain about the value of screening for depression. To screen for depression in postpartum women and evaluate positive screen findings to determine the timing of episode onset, rate and intensity of self-harm ideation, and primary and secondary DSM-IV disorders to inform treatment and policy decisions. Sequential case series of women who recently gave birth. Urban academic women's hospital. During the maternity hospitalization, women were offered screening at 4 to 6 weeks post partum by telephone. Screen-positive women were invited to undergo psychiatric evaluations in their homes. A positive screen finding was an Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) score of 10 or higher. Self-harm ideation was assessed on EPDS item 10: "The thought of harming myself has occurred to me" (yes, quite often; sometimes; hardly ever; never). Screen-positive women underwent evaluation with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV for Axis I primary and secondary diagnoses. Ten thousand mothers underwent screening, with positive findings in 1396 (14.0%); of these, 826 (59.2%) completed the home visits and 147 (10.5%) completed a telephone diagnostic interview. Screen-positive women were more likely to be younger, African American, publicly insured, single, and less well educated. More episodes began post partum (40.1%), followed by during pregnancy (33.4%) and before pregnancy (26.5%). In this population, 19.3% had self-harm ideation. All mothers with the highest intensity of self-harm ideation were identified with the EPDS score of 10 or higher. The most common primary diagnoses were unipolar depressive disorders (68.5%), and almost two-thirds had comorbid anxiety disorders. A striking 22.6% had bipolar disorders. The most common diagnosis in screen-positive women was major depressive disorder with comorbid generalized anxiety disorder. Strategies to differentiate women with bipolar from unipolar disorders are needed. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00282776.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The validation of the Edinburgh Post-natal Depression Scale on a community sample.

            The Edinburgh Post-natal Depression Scale (EPDS) was validated on a community sample of 702 women at six weeks post-partum using Research Diagnostic Criteria for depression. The estimates of sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value, being based on a large random sample, offer improved guidelines for the use of the EPDS by the primary care team.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Variability in use of cut-off scores and formats on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale: implications for clinical and research practice.

              i) To highlight the increasing use in the literature of unvalidated cut-off scores on the Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS/EPDS), as well as different wording and formatting in the scale; ii) to investigate and discuss the possible impact of using an unvalidated cut-off score; iii) to highlight possible reasons for these 'errors'; and iv) to make recommendations to clinicians and researchers who use the EDS/EPDS. A convenience sample of studies that have used unvalidated cut-off scores, or different formatting, are cited as evidence that these types of 'errors' are occurring fairly frequently. Examination of previous data from one of the authors is undertaken to determine the effect of using an unvalidated cut-off score. Many studies report rates of high scorers on the EDS/EPDS using different cut-off scores to the validated ones. The effect of doing this on the overall rate can be substantial. The effect of using different formatting is not known, though excluding items from the EDS/EPDS must also make a substantial difference. We recommend that i) the validated score of 13 or more is used when reporting on probable major depression in postnatal English-speaking women, and 15 or more when reporting on antenatal English-speaking women; ii) that the wording used is "13 or more" (or equivalent), and not other terms that may cause confusion (e.g., '>12'; 'more than 12'; '13' etc), iii) if a different cut-off score to the validated one is used, a clear explanation is given as to why this has been done; and iv) that the scale should be worded and formatted as originally described by its authors.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                tingtingsha@csu.edu.cn
                18670321975@163.com
                849352541@qq.com
                2528432084@qq.com
                gangcheng@csu.edu.cn
                wuxl9404@163.com
                15274979382@163.com
                yyangff009@163.com
                qqniuniu0525@163.com
                yanyan802394@126.com
                Journal
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2393
                28 October 2019
                28 October 2019
                2019
                : 19
                : 388
                Affiliations
                ISNI 0000 0001 0379 7164, GRID grid.216417.7, Department of Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, Xiangya School of Public Health, , Central South University, ; Changsha, Hunan China
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7479-637X
                Article
                2559
                10.1186/s12884-019-2559-1
                6819524
                31660900
                f4d98dc2-a0d5-43e9-8df9-211c0c1d0e74
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 18 December 2018
                : 14 October 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001809, National Natural Science Foundation of China;
                Award ID: 81673276
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002822, Central South University;
                Award ID: 2018zzts237
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                Obstetrics & Gynecology

                Comments

                Comment on this article