Suppr超能文献

实施围产期焦虑的常规评估:案例研究

Implementing routine assessment of perinatal anxiety: case studies.

作者信息

Sinesi Andrea, Constantinou Georgina, Yuill Cassandra, Meades Rose, Cheyne Helen, Maxwell Margaret, Best Catherine, Ayers Susan, Shakespeare Judy, Alderdice Fiona, Jomeen Julie, Howard Grace

机构信息

Centre for Healthcare and Community Research (CHeCR), Pathfoot Building, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.

Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City St George's, University of London, London, UK.

出版信息

Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 May 21:1-17. doi: 10.3310/WWMD9982.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

During pregnancy and the first postnatal year, a substantial proportion of women experience perinatal anxiety, which is associated with increased risk of adverse birth, maternal and child development outcomes. Identification of perinatal anxiety is recommended in various countries, but there is a lack of consensus on the most effective, acceptable and feasible measure to use. The Methods of Assessing Perinatal Anxiety study previously found the Stirling Antenatal Anxiety Scale to be diagnostically accurate and acceptable to women.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine the acceptability and feasibility of implementing new assessment of perinatal anxiety in healthcare services.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Implementation case studies of perinatal anxiety assessment using the Stirling Antenatal Anxiety Scale in three National Health Service sites in the United Kingdom. Semistructured interviews and focus groups were conducted before and after implementation with healthcare professionals working in maternity, primary care and psychological services that had contact with perinatal women. Preimplementation data collection was used to develop an implementation and training strategy for each site. Interviews and focus groups were conducted with the same participants post implementation. Data were analysed using framework analysis and a combined inductive-deductive approach.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Two National Health Service trusts in England and one National Health Service health board in Scotland. Participants were healthcare professionals, including midwives, health visitors, clinical psychologists and mental health nurses, who used the scale during the implementation period. Other stakeholders such as service managers and team leads were also interviewed. Sites were selected to represent different types of service and pathways of care. The sample comprised 37 participants at preimplementation and 27 at the postimplementation stage.

INTERVENTION

Implementation of new assessment of perinatal anxiety in National Health Service services.

RESULTS

At the English sites, one focus group and two interviews were conducted at site E1, and five interviews at site E2. At the Scottish site, two focus groups and six interviews were conducted. Evaluation findings were categorised into 5 themes (experience of change in practice, barriers/facilitators to implementation, acceptability, feasibility, improvements to implementation strategy) with 16 subthemes. The experience of introducing a new assessment tool in clinical practice was generally seen as positive, with the scale enabling more focused conversations with women about their symptoms and different types of anxiety. Potential barriers to conducting assessments included women not having English as first language and stigma towards anxiety in some cultures. The scale overall was acceptable to healthcare professionals. Recommendations to improve the implementation strategy included adding the tool to patients' electronic notes and getting wider buy-in from senior management.

LIMITATIONS

Healthcare practitioners mainly used paper versions of the scale, while most National Health Service services are moving towards patients' electronic notes. Only 73% of participants were interviewed at the postimplementation stage. Variation in clinical pathways and services means results may not be generalisable to other settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a new measure of perinatal anxiety was perceived positively overall.

FUTURE WORK

Further research should explore the use of a digital version of the tool and translated versions. Replication in National Health Service services with different care pathways is also recommended.

FUNDING

This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme as award number 17/105/16.

摘要

背景

在孕期及产后第一年,相当一部分女性会经历围产期焦虑,这与不良分娩、母婴发育结局风险增加相关。各国均建议识别围产期焦虑,但对于最有效、可接受且可行的评估方法尚无共识。先前的围产期焦虑评估方法研究发现,斯特林产前焦虑量表诊断准确且女性可接受。

目的

本研究旨在确定在医疗服务中实施围产期焦虑新评估方法的可接受性和可行性。

设计与方法

在英国三个国民保健服务机构中,采用斯特林产前焦虑量表进行围产期焦虑评估的实施案例研究。在实施前后,对从事产科、初级保健和心理服务且接触围产期女性的医护人员进行半结构化访谈和焦点小组讨论。实施前的数据收集用于为每个机构制定实施和培训策略。实施后对相同参与者进行访谈和焦点小组讨论。采用框架分析法和归纳 - 演绎相结合的方法对数据进行分析。

设置与参与者

英格兰的两个国民保健服务信托机构和苏格兰的一个国民保健服务健康委员会。参与者为医护人员,包括助产士、健康访视员、临床心理学家和精神科护士,他们在实施期间使用该量表。还采访了服务经理和团队负责人等其他利益相关者。所选机构代表不同类型的服务和护理途径。样本包括实施前的37名参与者和实施后的27名参与者。

干预措施

在国民保健服务中实施围产期焦虑新评估方法。

结果

在英格兰的机构中,E1机构进行了1次焦点小组讨论和2次访谈,E2机构进行了5次访谈。在苏格兰的机构中,进行了2次焦点小组讨论和6次访谈。评估结果分为5个主题(实践变革体验、实施的障碍/促进因素、可接受性、可行性、实施策略改进)及16个子主题。在临床实践中引入新评估工具的体验总体上被视为积极的,该量表使医护人员能与女性就其症状和不同类型的焦虑进行更有针对性的对话。进行评估的潜在障碍包括女性非英语母语以及某些文化中对焦虑的污名化。该量表总体上为医护人员所接受。改进实施策略的建议包括将该工具添加到患者电子病历中并获得高级管理层更广泛的支持。

局限性

医护人员主要使用纸质版量表,而大多数国民保健服务机构正朝着使用患者电子病历的方向发展。实施后阶段仅73%的参与者接受了访谈。临床途径和服务的差异意味着结果可能无法推广到其他环境。

结论

总体上对围产期焦虑新评估方法的实施评价积极。

未来工作

进一步研究应探索该工具数字版及翻译版的使用。还建议在具有不同护理途径的国民保健服务机构中进行重复研究。

资金来源

本文介绍了由国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生与社会保健交付研究计划资助的独立研究,资助编号为17/105/16。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验