Webb Rebecca, Ford Elizabeth, Shakespeare Judy, Easter Abigail, Alderdice Fiona, Holly Jennifer, Coates Rose, Hogg Sally, Cheyne Helen, McMullen Sarah, Gilbody Simon, Salmon Debra, Ayers Susan
Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, London, UK.
Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Brighton & Sussex Medical School, Falmer, UK.
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Jan;12(2):1-187. doi: 10.3310/KQFE0107.
Perinatal mental health difficulties can occur during pregnancy or after birth and mental illness is a leading cause of maternal death. It is therefore important to identify the barriers and facilitators to implementing and accessing perinatal mental health care.
Our research objective was to develop a conceptual framework of barriers and facilitators to perinatal mental health care (defined as identification, assessment, care and treatment) to inform perinatal mental health services.
Two systematic reviews were conducted to synthesise the evidence on: Review 1 barriers and facilitators to implementing perinatal mental health care; and Review 2 barriers to women accessing perinatal mental health care. Results were used to develop a conceptual framework which was then refined through consultations with stakeholders.
Pre-planned searches were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo and CINAHL. Review 2 also included Scopus and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
In Review 1, studies were included if they examined barriers or facilitators to implementing perinatal mental health care. In Review 2, systematic reviews were included if they examined barriers and facilitators to women seeking help, accessing help and engaging in perinatal mental health care; and they used systematic search strategies. Only qualitative papers were identified from the searches. Results were analysed using thematic synthesis and themes were mapped on to a theoretically informed multi-level model then grouped to reflect different stages of the care pathway.
Review 1 included 46 studies. Most were carried out in higher income countries and evaluated as good quality with low risk of bias. Review 2 included 32 systematic reviews. Most were carried out in higher income countries and evaluated as having low confidence in the results. Barriers and facilitators to perinatal mental health care were identified at seven levels: (e.g. beliefs about mental illness); (e.g. confidence addressing perinatal mental illness); (e.g. relationship between women and health professionals); (e.g. continuity of carer); (e.g. referral pathways); (e.g. women's economic status); and (e.g. stigma). These factors impacted on perinatal mental health care at different stages of the care pathway. Results from reviews were synthesised to develop two MATRIx conceptual frameworks of the (1) barriers and (2) facilitators to perinatal mental health care. These provide pictorial representations of 66 barriers and 39 facilitators that intersect across the care pathway and at different levels.
In Review 1 only 10% of abstracts were double screened and 10% of included papers methodologically appraised by two reviewers. The majority of reviews included in Review 2 were evaluated as having low ( = 14) or critically low ( = 5) confidence in their results. Both reviews only included papers published in academic journals and written in English.
The MATRIx frameworks highlight the complex interplay of individual and system level factors across different stages of the care pathway that influence women accessing perinatal mental health care and effective implementation of perinatal mental health services.
These include using the conceptual frameworks to inform comprehensive, strategic and evidence-based approaches to perinatal mental health care; ensuring care is easy to access and flexible; providing culturally sensitive care; adequate funding of services; and quality training for health professionals with protected time to do it.
Further research is needed to examine access to perinatal mental health care for specific groups, such as fathers, immigrants or those in lower income countries.
This trial is registered as PROSPERO: (R1) CRD42019142854; (R2) CRD42020193107.
This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR 128068) and is published in full in ; Vol. 12, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
围产期心理健康问题可在孕期或产后出现,精神疾病是孕产妇死亡的主要原因。因此,识别实施和获得围产期心理健康护理的障碍和促进因素非常重要。
我们的研究目标是构建一个围产期心理健康护理(定义为识别、评估、护理和治疗)的障碍和促进因素概念框架,以为围产期心理健康服务提供参考。
进行了两项系统评价以综合以下方面的证据:评价1实施围产期心理健康护理的障碍和促进因素;评价2妇女获得围产期心理健康护理的障碍。结果用于构建一个概念框架,然后通过与利益相关者协商进行完善。
对MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsychInfo和CINAHL进行了预先计划的检索。评价2还包括Scopus和Cochrane系统评价数据库。
在评价1中,如果研究考察了实施围产期心理健康护理的障碍或促进因素,则纳入该研究。在评价2中,如果系统评价考察了妇女寻求帮助、获得帮助和参与围产期心理健康护理的障碍和促进因素,并且使用了系统检索策略,则纳入该系统评价。检索仅识别出定性论文。结果采用主题综合法进行分析,主题被映射到一个理论上有依据的多层次模型上,然后进行分组以反映护理路径的不同阶段。
评价1纳入了46项研究。大多数研究在高收入国家进行,质量评估为良好,偏倚风险低。评价2纳入了32项系统评价。大多数研究在高收入国家进行,结果的可信度评估为低。围产期心理健康护理的障碍和促进因素在七个层面被识别出来:(例如对精神疾病的看法);(例如处理围产期精神疾病的信心);(例如妇女与卫生专业人员之间的关系);(例如护理人员的连续性);(例如转诊途径);(例如妇女的经济状况);以及(例如耻辱感)。这些因素在护理路径的不同阶段影响围产期心理健康护理。评价结果被综合起来,构建了两个围产期心理健康护理(1)障碍和(2)促进因素的MATRIx概念框架。这些框架提供了66个障碍和39个促进因素的图形表示,它们在护理路径和不同层面相互交叉。
在评价1中,仅10%的摘要进行了双人筛选,10%的纳入论文由两名评审员进行了方法学评估。评价2中纳入的大多数系统评价结果的可信度评估为低(=14)或极低(=5)。两项评价都仅纳入了发表在学术期刊上且用英语撰写的论文。
MATRIx框架突出了护理路径不同阶段个体和系统层面因素的复杂相互作用,这些因素影响妇女获得围产期心理健康护理以及围产期心理健康服务的有效实施。
这些建议包括使用概念框架为围产期心理健康护理提供全面、战略和基于证据的方法;确保护理易于获得且灵活;提供文化敏感的护理;为服务提供充足的资金;以及为卫生专业人员提供高质量培训并给予受保护的时间来进行培训。
需要进一步研究特定群体(如父亲、移民或低收入国家的人群)获得围产期心理健康护理的情况。
本试验在PROSPERO注册:(R1)CRD42019142854;(R2)CRD42020193107。
本奖项由国家卫生与保健研究机构(NIHR)卫生与社会保健交付研究计划资助(NIHR奖项编号:NIHR 128068),全文发表于;第12卷,第2期。有关进一步的奖项信息,请参阅NIHR资金与奖项网站。