Dataset Information

Decision-making about antidepressant medication use in pregnancy: a comparison between women making the decision in the preconception period versus in pregnancy.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Decisions about antidepressant use in pregnancy are complex. Little is known about how pregnancy-planning and already pregnant women making these decisions differ. METHODS:In 95 Canadian women having difficulty deciding whether to take antidepressants in pregnancy, we compared sociodemographic factors, clinical characteristics, and treatment intent between women planning pregnancy (preconception women) and currently-pregnant women. RESULTS:About 90% of preconception women (n?=?55) were married or cohabitating and university-educated, and over 60% had an annual income of >?80,000 CAD/year; this was not different from currently-pregnant women (n?=?40). Almost all women had previously used antidepressants, but preconception women were more likely to report current use (85.5% vs. 45.0%). They were more likely to have high decisional conflict (83.6% vs. 60.0%) and less likely to be under the care of a psychiatrist (29.1% vs. 52.5%). Preconception women were more likely than pregnant women to report the intent to use antidepressants (60% vs. 32.5%, odds ratio 3.11, 95% confidence interval 1.33-7.32); this was partially explained by between-group differences in current antidepressant use. CONCLUSIONS:Preconception women were more likely than pregnant women to intend to use antidepressants in pregnancy, in part because more of them were already using this treatment. Strategies to enhance support for decision-making about antidepressant medication use in pregnancy may need to be tailored differently for pregnancy-planning and already pregnant women.

SUBMITTER: Barker LC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7007680 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Decision-making about antidepressant medication use in pregnancy: a comparison between women making the decision in the preconception period versus in pregnancy.

Barker Lucy C LC Dennis Cindy-Lee CL Hussain-Shamsy Neesha N Stewart Donna E DE Grigoriadis Sophie S Metcalfe Kelly K Oberlander Tim F TF Schram Carrie C Taylor Valerie H VH Vigod Simone N SN

BMC psychiatry 20200207 1

<h4>Background</h4>Decisions about antidepressant use in pregnancy are complex. Little is known about how pregnancy-planning and already pregnant women making these decisions differ.<h4>Methods</h4>In 95 Canadian women having difficulty deciding whether to take antidepressants in pregnancy, we compared sociodemographic factors, clinical characteristics, and treatment intent between women planning pregnancy (preconception women) and currently-pregnant women.<h4>Results</h4>About 90% of preconcept ...[more]

PMID: 32033547

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionWomen with pre-existing morbidity arising from medical conditions or previous caesarean section are at higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes compared to women without such morbidity. Women often face complex pregnancy-related decision-making that may be characterized by conflicting maternal and perinatal priorities. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess randomised controlled trials of decision aids to evaluate whether they are effective at reducing decisional conflict scores and to evaluate what type of decision aids are most effective for women with pre-existing morbidity in pregnancy.MethodsWe searched Medline (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO) from the earliest entries until September 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials comparing patient decision aids for women with pre-existing morbidity with usual clinical practice or a control intervention. Study characteristics and Jadad risk of bias was recorded. Meta-analysis by pre-existing morbidity type was performed using Stata 17 and the data was presented with a Forest Plot. Random effects models were used to calculate summary estimates if there was substantial clinical or statistical heterogeneity and post mean DCS scores were described in a sensitivity analysis and presented as a line graph, to improve clinical interpretation of results.. A narrative synthesis of the selected studies evaluated what type of decision aid works and for in what circumstances.ResultsTen randomised controlled trials, which reported data from 4028 women, were included. Patient decision aids were evaluated in women with pre-existing morbidity who were undertaking pregnancy-related decision-making. Patient decision aids reduced decisional conflict scale scores by an additional - 3.7, 95% Confidence Interval - 5.9% to - 1.6%) compared to the control group. Women with pre-existing medical conditions were more conflicted at baseline and had greater reductions in decisional conflict scale score (mean difference vs. control group: - 6.6%; 95% CI - 9.8% to - 3.3%), in contrast to those with previous caesarean section (mean difference - 2.4%; 95% CI - 4.8% to - 0.1%). There was limited evidence on the effect of decision aids on health outcomes. Decision aids reduced unwanted variation in decision-making support across maternity settings.ConclusionPatient decision aids are effective tools to support personalised care planning and informed decision-making in women with pre-existing morbidity. Women with pre-existing medical morbidity were more conflicted at baseline and were more likely to benefit from decision aids. Adoption of aids in this population may lead to improve adherence and health outcomes, warranting further research.

Project description:BackgroundWomen with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with poor IBD-specific reproductive knowledge experience more childlessness and fear of IBD medications in pregnancy. The Pregnancy in IBD Decision Aid (PIDA), developed by an international multidisciplinary team, offers personalized online decision support regarding pregnancy in IBD.AimsAssess the impact of PIDA on quality of reproductive decision-making and pregnancy-related knowledge among preconception (PC) and pregnant patients with IBD, and evaluate acceptability to patients and clinicians.MethodsPC and pregnant patients with IBD aged 18-45 completed questionnaires pre- and post-PIDA to assess quality of decision-making (Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS); Decision Self-Efficacy Scale (DSES) and IBD-in-pregnancy knowledge (Crohn's and Colitis Pregnancy Knowledge Score (CCPKnow)). Paired t test assessed for differences pre- and post-PIDA. Patients and clinicians completed acceptability surveys.ResultsDCS and DSES were completed by 74 patients (42 Crohn's disease, 32 ulcerative colitis); 41 PC and 33 pregnant. DCS improved significantly post-PIDA in PC patients regarding pregnancy planning (t(40) = 4.83, p < 0.0001, Cohen's dz = 0.75) and in pregnant patients regarding medication management (t(32) = 2.37, p = 0.0242, dz = 0.41). DSES for PC patients improved significantly post-PIDA (t(40) = -3.56, p = 0.001, dz = -0.56). CCPKnow improved significantly post-PIDA in PC (t(42) = 4.93, p < 0.0001, dz = -0.75) and pregnant patients (t(32) = 5.1, p < 0.0001, dz = -0.89). PIDA was deemed optimal for length, readability, and content amount and considered highly useful by patients (n = 73) and clinicians (n = 14).ConclusionsPatients using PIDA developed an improved quality of reproductive decision-making and IBD-in-pregnancy knowledge. PIDA is an accessible tool that can empower women with IBD to make values-congruent, evidence-based decisions regarding pregnancy and may reduce voluntary childlessness.

Project description:ObjectiveDesign and pilot test a new decision making tool for women with physical disabilities (impairment of physical function due to chronic conditions) considering pregnancy.Data sources and study settingQuantitative surveys and qualitative interviews were collected from participants living in the community.Study designClinical guidelines and survey and focus group data about pregnancy informational and decisional needs guided content development. The tool was pilot tested in a 12-week trial with participants with physical disabilities considering or actively planning a pregnancy. Feasibility outcomes were acceptability, implementation, and demand (collected at end of the trial); preliminary efficacy focused on decisional conflict and readiness (baseline, 6 weeks, and end of trial).Data collectionSurvey data were collected using an online form. One-on-one interviews were conducted to learn more about experience using the tool.Principal findingsThirty eight participants with mild, moderate, or severe physical disabilities participated. Feasibility outcomes indicated that the tool provided participants with information, guiding questions, and helped them to consider multiple aspects of the decision about pregnancy. Most participants responded positively to the new decision making tool, finding it easy to use and the information balanced. Feedback highlighted opportunity for improvement, such as more specific information, peer stories, and the limitations of a paper format. There was significant linear effect of time, with increased decisional certainty and readiness, values clarity, and decisional support (partial η2 [90% CI] = 0.310 [0.08, 0.46], 0.435 [0.19, 0.60], 0.134 [0, 0.29], 0.178 [0.01, 0.35], respectively). Decisional certainty and readiness had high observed power (96.7% and 99.3%, respectively) with lower observed power for clarity and support (60.6% and 75.1%, respectively).ConclusionsThe new tool shows promise for supporting women with physical disabilities in navigating pregnancy decision making. Future development of complementary strategies to support health care providers will help improve shared decision making and patient-centered care.

Project description:Importance:Maternal antidepressant medication use during pregnancy has previously been associated with adverse outcomes in offspring, but to our knowledge, the association with intellectual disability (ID) has not been investigated. Objectives:To examine the association of maternal antidepressant medication use during pregnancy with ID in offspring and investigate the importance of parental mental illness for such an association. Design, Setting, and Participants:A population-based cohort study of 179?007 children born from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2007, with complete parental information from national registers who were followed up from birth throughout 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures:We estimated relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs of ID in children exposed during pregnancy to any antidepressant medication or specifically to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants, all other non-SSRI antidepressants, or other nonantidepressant psychotropic medications. Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders. In addition to full population analyses, we used a subsample to compare mothers who used antidepressants during pregnancy with mothers who had at least one diagnosis of depression or anxiety before childbirth but did not use antidepressants during pregnancy. Results:Of the 179?007 children included in the study (mean [SD] age at end of follow-up, 7.9 [0.6] years; 92 133 [51.5%] male and 86 874 [48.5%] female), ID was diagnosed in 37 children (0.9%) exposed to antidepressants and in 819 children (0.5%) unexposed to antidepressants. With adjustment for potential confounders, the RR of ID after antidepressant exposure was estimated at 1.33 (95% CI, 0.90-1.98) in the full population sample and 1.64 (95% CI, 0.95-2.83) in the subsample of women with depression. Results from analyses of SSRI antidepressants, non-SSRI antidepressants, and nonantidepressant psychotropic medications and analyses in the clinically relevant subsample did not deviate from the full-sample results. Conclusions and Relevance:The unadjusted RR of ID was increased in offspring born to mothers treated with antidepressants during pregnancy. After adjustment for confounding factors, however, the current study did not find evidence of an association between ID and maternal antidepressant medication use during pregnancy. Instead, the association may be attributable to a mechanism integral to other factors, such as parental age and mother's psychiatric disorder.

Dataset Information

Decision-making about antidepressant medication use in pregnancy: a comparison between women making the decision in the preconception period versus in pregnancy.

Publications

Decision-making about antidepressant medication use in pregnancy: a comparison between women making the decision in the preconception period versus in pregnancy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets