Centre Referent de Rehabilitation Psychosociale, GCSMS REHACOOR 42, Saint-Étienne, France.
INSERM U1290, Research on Healthcare Performance (RESHAPE), University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
Eur Psychiatry. 2023 Oct 20;66(1):e86. doi: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.2464.
Perinatal mental health disorders (PMHD) remain often undetected, undiagnosed, and untreated with variable access to perinatal mental health care (PMHC). To guide the design of optimal PMHC (i.e., coproduced with persons with lived experience [PLEs]), this qualitative participatory study explored the experiences, views, and expectations of PLEs, obstetric providers (OP), childcare health providers (CHPs), and mental health providers (MHPs) on PMHC and the care of perinatal depression.
We conducted nine focus groups and 24 individual interviews between December 2020 and May 2022 for a total number of 84 participants (24 PLEs; 30 OPs; 11 CHPs; and 19 MHPs). The PLEs group included women with serious mental illness (SMI) or autistic women who had contact with perinatal health services. We recruited PLEs through social media and a center for psychiatric rehabilitation, and health providers (HPs) through perinatal health networks. We used the inductive six-step process by Braun and Clarke for the thematic analysis.
We found some degree of difference in the identified priorities between PLEs (e.g., personal recovery, person-centered care) and HPs (e.g., common culture, communication between providers, and risk management). Personal recovery in PMHD corresponded to the CHIME framework, that is, connectedness, hope, identity, meaning, and empowerment. Recovery-supporting relations and peer support contributed to personal recovery. Other factors included changes in the socio-cultural conception of the peripartum, challenging stigma (e.g., integrating PMH into standard perinatal healthcare), and service integration.
This analysis generated novel insights into how to improve PMHC for all users including those with SMI or autism.
围产期心理健康障碍(PMHD)仍然经常未被发现、未被诊断,且治疗方法因围产期心理健康保健(PMHC)的可及性而有所不同。为了指导最优 PMHC 的设计(即与具有生活经验的人共同制定[PLEs]),这项定性参与性研究探讨了 PLEs、产科提供者(OP)、儿童保健健康提供者(CHP)和心理健康提供者(MHP)对 PMHC 和围产期抑郁护理的经验、观点和期望。
我们于 2020 年 12 月至 2022 年 5 月进行了 9 次焦点小组和 24 次个人访谈,共有 84 名参与者(24 名 PLEs;30 名 OP;11 名 CHP;19 名 MHP)。PLEs 组包括患有严重精神疾病(SMI)或自闭症的女性,她们曾接触过围产期保健服务。我们通过社交媒体和精神病康复中心招募 PLEs,通过围产期保健网络招募保健提供者(HPs)。我们使用 Braun 和 Clarke 的六步归纳过程进行主题分析。
我们发现 PLEs 和 HPs 之间在确定的重点方面存在一定程度的差异(例如,个人康复、以患者为中心的护理)。PMHD 中的个人康复与 CHIME 框架相对应,即联系、希望、身份、意义和赋权。康复支持关系和同伴支持有助于个人康复。其他因素包括围产期社会文化观念的变化、挑战污名(例如,将 PMH 纳入标准围产期保健)和服务整合。
这项分析为如何改善所有用户(包括患有 SMI 或自闭症的用户)的 PMHC 提供了新的见解。