Conceptualization, measurement, and effects of pregnancy-specific stress: review of research using the original and revised Prenatal Distress Questionnaire

Ibrahim, Sirena M.; Lobel, Marci

doi:10.1007/s10865-019-00068-7

Cited by 89 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 105 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The original PDQ was found to be significantly associated with general stress measures (STAI, Life Event Stress, and PSS) [18]. The Revised Prenatal Distress Questionnaire (NuPDQ) is a particularly appropriate tool to assess PSS; it has shown to have good validity and reliability [7,16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Italian version of the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) and its correlations with pregnancy-specific stress

Penengo

Colli

Garzitto

et al. 2020

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Pregnancy is a period of happiness but also of physical and psychological changes that can lead to distress. Functional coping strategies can reduce the pregnancy specific-stress. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) in an Italian sample and to investigate how coping strategies were associated with pregnancy-specific stress. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, low-risk pregnant women (N = 211) were assessed with NuPCI, NuPDQ (Revised-Prenatal Distress Questionnaire), Brief-COPE (Coping Orientation to the Problems Experienced), and STAI (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory). The reliability of NuPCI was evaluated by assessing its internal consistency and factor structure (with a Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA). The concurrent validity between NuPCI and Brief-COPE and NuPDQ and STAI was investigated. Lastly, the relationship between NuPCI and NuPDQ was analyzed, as well as the ability of these scales to predict Apgar score at birth. Results: Internal consistency of NuPCI scales was good for Planning-Preparation (ɑ C =0.84) and Spiritual-Positive Coping (ɑ C =0.81) scales, acceptable for Avoidance (ɑ C =0.76) scale. Moreover, the original three-factor structure was confirmed using a CFA with 29 of the 32 items (χ 2 374 = 618.06; RMSEA = 0.056, 95% confidence interval: [0.048, 0.063]); CFI = 0.920; and TLI = 0.913). Statistically significant correlations between NuPCI scales and Brief-COPE subscales ranged between r = + 0.217 and r = + 0.624; also, NuPDQ score was positively correlated with STAI scales (State scale: r = + 0.539; Trait scale: r = + 0.462). Concurrent validity was confirmed reporting that NuPDQ score was predicted by NuPCI scores (R 2 = 0.423, p < 0.001), positively by Avoidance (β=+0.572) and Planning-Preparation (β=+0.215) and negatively by Spiritual-Positive Coping (β=-0.132). Finally, considering the stress, the effect of the Avoidance and Spiritual-Positive Coping scores respectively in decreasing (+ 155%) and increasing (+ 16%) the Apgar score became stronger. Conclusions: Italian NuPCI has sound psychometric properties and it is a useful coping measure. NuPDQ showed also a good validity. Our results may suggest a significant role for coping strategies, particularly in modulating the condition of the newborn at birth.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Italian version of the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) and its correlations with pregnancy-specific stress

Penengo

Colli

Garzitto

et al. 2020

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the Prenatal Coping Inventory (PCI), developed by Yali and Lobel [10], and its revised version, the NuPCI [11], are the speci c measures for pregnancy to be preferred. In particular, the good internal consistency of NuPCI has been confirmed in several studies in USA and elsewhere in high and low risk pregnant women [12][13][14][15][16].…”

mentioning

confidence: 66%

“…Many studies had focused on speci c periods of pregnancy and only a few had examined coping across all pregnancy [7]. This is an important point because it is well known that stressors undergo main changes during pregnancy, probably with concomitant modi cations in the coping strategies (e.g., [16]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validation of the Italian version of the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) and its correlations with Pregnancy-Specific Stress.

Penengo

Colli

Garzitto

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Pregnancy is a period of happiness but also of physical and psychological changes that can lead to distress. Functional coping strategies can reduce the pregnancy specific-stress. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) in an Italian sample and to investigate how coping strategies were associated with pregnancy-specific stress.Methods: In this cross-sectional study, low-risk pregnant women (N=211) were assessed with NuPCI, NuPDQ (Revised-Prenatal Distress Questionnaire), Brief-COPE (Coping Orientation to the Problems Experienced), and STAI (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory). The reliability of NuPCI was evaluated by assessing its internal consistency and factor structure (with a Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA). The concurrent validity between NuPCI and Brief-COPE and NuPDQ and STAI was investigated. Lastly, the relationship between NuPCI and NuPDQ was analyzed, as well as the ability of these scales to predict Apgar score at birth.Results: Internal consistency of NuPCI scales was good for Planning-Preparation (ɑC=0.84) and Spiritual-Positive Coping (ɑC=0.81) scales, acceptable for Avoidance (ɑC=0.76) scale. Moreover, the original three-factor structure was confirmed using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis with 29 of the 32 items (χ2374=618.06; RMSEA=0.056, 95% confidence interval: [0.048, 0.063]); CFI=0.920; and TLI=0.913). Statistically significant correlations between NuPCI scales and Brief-COPE subscales ranged between r=+0.217 and r=+0.624; also, NuPDQ score was positively correlated with STAI scales (State scale: r=+0.539; Trait scale: r=+0.462). Concurrent validity was confirmed reporting that NuPDQ score was predicted by NuPCI scores (R2=0.423, p<0.001), positively by Avoidance (β=+0.572) and Planning-Preparation (β=+0.215) and negatively by Spiritual-Positive Coping (β=-0.132). Finally, considering the stress, the effect of the Avoidance and Spiritual-Positive Coping scores respectively in decreasing (+155%) and increasing (+16%) the Apgar score became stronger.Conclusions: Italian NuPCI has sound psychometric properties and it is a useful coping measure. NuPDQ showed also a good validity. Our results may suggest a significant role for coping strategies, particularly in modulating the condition of the newborn at birth.

show abstract

“…If not treated, prenatal distress affects not only the mother but also the health of the fetus, infant and child [3,5,6]. A positive relation was reported between anxiety and stress levels and medical risk and past or present pregnancy complications in pregnancy [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prenatal distress level and its predictors according to the gestational age in pregnant women in the semi-urban region in Northwestern Turkey: A cross-sectional study

Mercan

Selçuk

Dığın

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of the present study was to determine the level and predictors of prenatal distress in pregnant women according to gestational age.Methods: This a cross-sectional study was conducted in eight Family Health Centers (FHCs) in Kirklareli, in Turkey. The study included 179 pregnant women who presented to the FHCs, who were at ≥12th week of gestation. Results:The frequency of prenatal distress in the participants was 21.2% (between 12th-27th weeks:16.5%, between 28th-41st weeks: 26.8%). It was found that level of education, age of the spouse, current pregnancy being unplanned, and social support levels were associated with the level of prenatal distress in ≥12th week or between 12th-27th weeks or between 28th-41st weeks (p<0.05). And also, perceived income level, abortion, and the number of pregnancies were associated with the level of prenatal distress in ≥12th weeks; the age of women, perceived income levels, previous abortion experience, and the number of pregnancies were associated with the level of prenatal distress in between 12th-27th weeks; the age of women, education level of spouse', and previous birth experience prenatal distress levels were associated in between 28th-41st weeks (p<0.05).Conclusion: The level of prenatal distress according to the gestational age, the education level of the woman, the age of her spouse’, the unplanned pregnancy, and social support levels were predictors. In both periods, the age of women were determinants in prenatal stress levels in pregnant women. Pregnant women should be screened and evaluated for prenatal distress in their application to FHCs.

show abstract

Conceptualization, measurement, and effects of pregnancy-specific stress: review of research using the original and revised Prenatal Distress Questionnaire

Cited by 89 publications

References 105 publications

Validation of the Italian version of the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) and its correlations with pregnancy-specific stress

Validation of the Italian version of the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) and its correlations with pregnancy-specific stress

Validation of the Italian version of the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) and its correlations with Pregnancy-Specific Stress.

Prenatal distress level and its predictors according to the gestational age in pregnant women in the semi-urban region in Northwestern Turkey: A cross-sectional study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About