Effects of a mindfulness based childbirth and parenting program on pregnant women's perceived stress and risk of perinatal depression–Results from a randomized controlled trial

Lönnberg, Gunilla; Jonas, Wibke; Unternäehrer, Eva; Bränström, Richard; Nissen, Eva; Niemi, Maria

doi:10.1016/j.jad.2019.10.048

Cited by 63 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Twenty‐eight RCTs reported results of 1944 pregnant women. Nine RCTs were conducted in West Asia (Iran (Asghari et al., 2016; Bastani et al., 2005; Khorsandi et al., 2016; Mohammad & Shima, 2019; Nasiri et al., 2018; Shahtaheri et al., 2016; Zaheri et al., 2017) and Turkey (Ertekin et al., 2018; Fiskin & Sahin, 2018)); seven in Europe (Greece (Kantziari et al., 2019; Tragea et al., 2014), Germany (Richter et al., 2012), Ireland (Matvienko‐Sikar & Dockray, 2017), Sweden (Lönnberg et al., 2020; Scherer et al., 2016) and UK (Krusche et al., 2018)); five in USA (Guardino et al., 2014; Jallo et al., 2014; Urizar et al., 2019; Vieten & Astin, 2008; Zhang & Emory, 2015); three in India (Deshpande et al., 2013; Muthukrishnan et al., 2016; Satyapriya et al., 2009); two in China (Pan et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019); and two in Australia (Beattie et al., 2017; Woolhouse et al., 2014). The mean age of the participants ranged from 18 to 35 years old.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mind–body interventions on stress management in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Guo

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2020

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To quantify the effect of mind–body interventions on stress in pregnant women. Design A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed. Data Sources PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science and PsycINFO were searched from each database inception to January 2020. Review methods Randomized controlled trials regarding mind–body interventions for stress in pregnant women were included. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration ‘Risk of Bias’ tool and meta‐analysis was performed via RevMan 5.3. Subgroup analysis and publication bias assessment were conducted. Post hoc sensitivity analysis was performed to investigate the source of heterogeneity. Results In total, 28 studies comprising 1944 participants were included. The overall meta‐analysis showed that antenatal stress of pregnant women in the mind–body interventions groups showed significant high improvements (SMD=−0.94; 95% CI [−1.25, −0.63]; p < .00001) compared with the control groups. Results of subgroup analyses indicated that all types of mind–body interventions including mindfulness intervention, cognitive behavioural therapy, relaxation techniques and yoga were beneficial to antenatal stress. Both groups and individual formats mind–body interventions were effective. 4–8 weeks mind–body interventions were seemed as the optimal choice. Moreover, mind–body interventions were concomitant with reducing antenatal anxiety and depression. Conclusion Mind–body interventions are promising approaches for stress reduction in pregnant women. Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted with caution because of high heterogeneity and publication bias. Further high‐quality studies are needed to verify the findings. Impact Mind–body interventions have been widely implemented to ameliorate antenatal stress, but conflicting results were found across studies. This systematic review and meta‐analysis suggested that mind–body interventions are relatively safe and convenient and can successfully promote antenatal stress. The suggestions proposed in this review may be useful for developing a scientific mind–body interventions regimen and encouraging the application of mind–body interventions in pregnant women, thereby managing antenatal stress effectively.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mind–body interventions on stress management in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Guo

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2020

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our preparatory studies 21,22 indicate that a woman practising Mindfetalness feels calm and safe. Mindfulness-based programmes have positive effects during pregnancy, [30][31][32] reduce perceived stress, increase positive state of mind, 33 and reduce the biomarker cortisol, 34 but we do not know to what extent these benefits can be linked to the spontaneous onset of childbirth.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mindfetalness to increase women’s awareness of fetal movements and pregnancy outcomes: a cluster‐randomised controlled trial including 39 865 women

Akselsson

Lindgren

Georgsson

et al. 2020

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To examine whether a method for raising women's awareness of fetal movements, Mindfetalness, can affect pregnancy outcomes.Design Cluster-randomised controlled trial.Setting Sixty-seven maternity clinics in Stockholm, Sweden.Population Women with singleton pregnancy with birth from 32 weeks' gestation.Methods Women registered at a clinic randomised to Mindfetalness were assigned to receive a leaflet about Mindfetalness (n = 19 639) in comparison with routine care (n = 20 226). Data were collected from a population-based register.Main outcome measures Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes after birth, visit to healthcare due to decrease in fetal movements. Other outcomes: Apgar score <4 at 5 minutes after birth, small-forgestational-age and mode of delivery.Results No difference (1.1 versus 1.1%, relative risk [RR] 1.0; 95% CI 0.8-1.2) was found between the Mindfetalness group and the Routine care group for a 5-minute Apgar score <7. Women in the Mindfetalness group contacted healthcare more often due to decreased fetal movements (6.6 versus 3.8%, RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.57-1.87). Mindfetalness was associated with a reduction of babies born small-for-gestational-age (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-1.00), babies born after gestational week 41 +6 (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-0.98) and caesarean sections (19.0 versus 20.0%, RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.91-0.99).Conclusions Mindfetalness did not reduce the number of babies born with an Apgar score <7. However, Mindfetalness was associated with the health benefits of decreased incidence of caesarean section and fewer children born small-for-gestational-age.

show abstract

“…Chou et al reported that NVP was positively correlated with perceived stress and maternal psychosocial adaptation, 37 which have been found to increase the risk of perinatal depression. 38,39 In addition, poor sleep quality is associated with mental health problems among pregnant women. A prospective longitudinal study reported that anxiety and depression is associated with poor sleep quality, and that this association is significant throughout the pregnancy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association Between Nausea and Vomiting During Pregnancy and Sleep Quality: Mediating Effect of Depressive Symptoms

Wang

Chen

et al. 2021

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nausea and vomiting during pregnancy (NVP) of varying degrees of severity are commonly experienced by pregnant women. This paper explores the association between NVP and poor sleep quality. Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in an obstetrics clinic. A total of 2494 pregnant women (representing a response rate of 92.7%) completed a selfadministered questionnaire. Results: Of the 2494 participants, the mean sleep duration was 7.76 hours, and 54.3% of them report poor sleep quality (ie, a Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index global score > 5). In this study, 49.1%, 49.3% and 1.6% women reported mild, moderate, and severe NVP, respectively. Compare with women with mild NVP, women with moderate or severe NVP were more likely to report poor sleep quality (χ 2 = 30.16, p < 0.001). After adjusted for demographics and gestational age, moderate and severe NVP were associated with poor sleep quality (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.40-1.96, and AOR = 2.95, 95% CI = 1.44-6.02, respectively). Moreover, depressive symptoms mediated the association between NVP and poor sleep quality (β = 0.060, p = 0.033, 95% CI = 0.028-0.180). Conclusion:Our study suggested that moderate and severe NVP increase the risk of poor sleep quality. Further studies are warranted that focus on the mechanisms of the association between NVP and poor sleep quality.

show abstract

Effects of a mindfulness based childbirth and parenting program on pregnant women's perceived stress and risk of perinatal depression–Results from a randomized controlled trial

Cited by 63 publications

References 44 publications

Mind–body interventions on stress management in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Mind–body interventions on stress management in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Mindfetalness to increase women’s awareness of fetal movements and pregnancy outcomes: a cluster‐randomised controlled trial including 39 865 women

Association Between Nausea and Vomiting During Pregnancy and Sleep Quality: Mediating Effect of Depressive Symptoms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About