Bastos Maria Helena, Furuta Marie, Small Rhonda, McKenzie-McHarg Kirstie, Bick Debra
Sergio Arouca National School of Public Health, Women, Children and Adolescent Research Group, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 10;2015(4):CD007194. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007194.pub2.
Childbirth is a complex life event that can be associated with both positive and negative psychological responses. When giving birth is experienced as particularly traumatic this can have a negative impact on a woman's postnatal emotional well-being. There has been an increasing focus on women's psychological trauma symptoms following childbirth, including the relatively rare phenomenon of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and the benefit of debriefing interventions to prevent this. In this review we examined the evidence for debriefing as a preventative intervention for psychological trauma following childbirth.
To assess the effects of debriefing interventions compared with standard postnatal care for the prevention of psychological trauma in women following childbirth.
The trials registers of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDANCTR-References and CCDANCTR-Studies) and the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group were searched up to 4 March 2015. These registers include relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Library (all years to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), and PsycINFO (1967 to date). Additional searches were conducted in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Maternity and Infant Care. The reference lists of all included studies were checked for additional published reports and citations of unpublished research. Experts in the field were contacted.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials comparing postnatal debriefing interventions with standard postnatal care for the prevention of psychological trauma of women following childbirth. The intervention consisted of at least one debriefing intervention session, which had the purpose of allowing women to describe their experience and to normalise their emotional reaction to that experience.
Three authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Meta-analysis was conducted where there were more than two trials examining the same outcomes.
We included seven trials (eight articles) from three countries (UK, Australia and Sweden) that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The number of women contributing data to each outcome varied from 102 to 1745. Methodological quality was variable and most of the studies were of low quality. The quality of evidence for the prevalence of psychological trauma (primary outcome) and the prevalence of depression symptoms was rated low or very low, based on few studies (ranging from a single study to three studies) with high risk of bias in main domains such as performance bias, random sequence generation, allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data. The quality of evidence for the remaining outcomes (that is prevalence of anxiety, prevalence of fear of childbirth, prevalence of general psychological morbidity, health service utilization and attrition from treatment) was not assessed as data were not available.Among women who had a high level of obstetric intervention during labour and birth, we found no difference between standard postnatal care with debriefing and standard postnatal care without debriefing on psychological trauma symptoms within three months postpartum (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.28 to 1.31; n = 425) or at three to six months postpartum (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.27 to 1.42; n = 246). The results were based on two trials, respectively. Among women who experienced a distressing or traumatic birth, there was no evidence of an effect of psychological debriefing on the prevention of PTSD (measured by the MINI-PTSD) at four to six weeks postpartum (RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.66 to 2.01; n = 102) or at six months (RR 0.35; 95% CI 0.10 to 1.23; n = 103). The results were based on one small trial. One trial involving low-risk women who delivered healthy infants at or near term reported no significant difference between the intervention group and the control group in the proportion of women who met the diagnostic criteria for psychological trauma during the year following childbirth (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.28; n = 1745). We did not find any information about attrition rates.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any high quality evidence to inform practice, with substantial heterogeneity being found between the studies conducted to date. There is little or no evidence to support either a positive or adverse effect of psychological debriefing for the prevention of psychological trauma in women following childbirth. There is no evidence to support routine debriefing for women who perceive giving birth as psychologically traumatic.Future research should provide greater detail of the outcome measures used, and with scales for measuring psychological trauma validated against clinical diagnostic interviews. High rates of obstetric intervention in some birth settings may mean that women require improved emotional care from health professionals to reduce the risk of childbirth being experienced as traumatic. As all included trials excluded women unable to communicate in the native language of the study setting, there is no information on the response of these women to psychological debriefing. No included studies were conducted in low or middle-income countries.
分娩是一个复杂的生活事件,可能与积极和消极的心理反应相关。当分娩经历特别创伤时,这可能会对女性产后的情绪健康产生负面影响。人们越来越关注女性产后的心理创伤症状,包括相对罕见的创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)现象,以及汇报干预措施对预防这种情况的益处。在本综述中,我们研究了汇报作为预防产后心理创伤的干预措施的证据。
评估汇报干预措施与标准产后护理相比,对预防产后女性心理创伤的效果。
截至2015年3月4日,检索了Cochrane抑郁、焦虑和神经症小组(CCDANCTR-参考文献和CCDANCTR-研究)以及Cochrane妊娠和分娩小组的试验注册库。这些注册库包括来自以下书目数据库的相关随机对照试验:Cochrane图书馆(迄今所有年份)、MEDLINE(1950年至今)、EMBASE(1974年至今)和PsycINFO(1967年至今)。还在CENTRAL、MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO以及母婴护理数据库中进行了额外搜索。检查了所有纳入研究的参考文献列表,以查找其他已发表的报告和未发表研究的引用。联系了该领域的专家。
我们纳入了随机对照试验(RCT)和半随机试验,比较产后汇报干预措施与标准产后护理对预防产后女性心理创伤的效果。干预措施包括至少一次汇报干预会议,目的是让女性描述她们的经历,并使她们对该经历的情绪反应正常化。
三位作者独立评估试验质量并提取数据。当有两项以上试验研究相同结果时,进行荟萃分析。
我们纳入了来自三个国家(英国、澳大利亚和瑞典)的七项试验(八篇文章),这些试验符合纳入标准。为每个结果贡献数据的女性人数从102到1745不等。方法学质量参差不齐,大多数研究质量较低。基于少数研究(从一项研究到三项研究),在主要领域如执行偏倚、随机序列生成、分配隐藏和不完整结果数据方面存在高偏倚风险,心理创伤患病率(主要结果)和抑郁症状患病率的证据质量被评为低或极低。由于没有数据,其余结果(即焦虑患病率、分娩恐惧患病率、一般心理发病率、卫生服务利用情况和治疗脱落率)的证据质量未被评估。在分娩过程中接受高水平产科干预的女性中,我们发现产后三个月内(RR 0.61;95%CI 0.28至1.31;n = 425)或产后三至六个月(RR 0.62;95%CI 0.27至1.42;n = 246),接受汇报的标准产后护理与未接受汇报的标准产后护理在心理创伤症状方面没有差异。结果分别基于两项试验。在经历痛苦或创伤性分娩的女性中,没有证据表明心理汇报对产后四至六周(RR 1.15;95%CI 0.66至2.01;n = 102)或六个月时预防PTSD(通过MINI-PTSD测量)有效果(RR 0.35;95%CI 0.10至1.23;n = 103)。结果基于一项小型试验。一项涉及足月或接近足月分娩健康婴儿的低风险女性的试验报告,干预组和对照组在产后一年内符合心理创伤诊断标准的女性比例没有显著差异(RR 1.06;95%CI 0.88至1.28;n = 1745)。我们没有找到关于脱落率的任何信息。
我们没有找到任何高质量的证据来指导实践,迄今进行的研究之间存在很大的异质性。几乎没有证据支持心理汇报对预防产后女性心理创伤有积极或不利影响。没有证据支持对认为分娩有心理创伤的女性进行常规汇报。未来的研究应该更详细地说明所使用的结果测量方法,并使用经过临床诊断访谈验证的心理创伤测量量表。在一些分娩环境中,产科干预的高发生率可能意味着女性需要卫生专业人员提供更好的情感护理,以降低分娩被视为创伤性经历的风险。由于所有纳入试验都排除了无法用研究环境的母语进行交流的女性,因此没有关于这些女性对心理汇报反应的信息。没有纳入的研究是在低收入或中等收入国家进行的。