Search

ObjectiveAn increase in the number of women who have fear of birth [FOB] has been reported globally; yet, how these women are identified varies. This study aimed to identify the most effective way of measuring FOB in clinical practice.DesignThis paper reports on a prospective cohort study; a core element of an explanatory mixed-methods study. This element explored the appropriateness of measures of anxiety (biomarkers and validated questionnaires) and observed any relationship between anxiety levels and clinical outcomes.ParticipantsA purposive sampling strategy was used. One hundred and forty-eight primigravida, during the 1st trimester, in two tertiary maternity units in England were included.Methods Demographic and baseline data were collected from participants in the first trimester of pregnancy along with FOB scores, and a saliva sample to measure cortisol level. In the third trimester, a second FOBS score, and saliva sample were collected, and the Personal Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) were administered to measure depression and anxiety respectively. FindingsThe FOBS was completed by 148 women in the first trimester and 80 in the third. Using a cut-off of 54, 30/148 (20%) women had a FOB in the first trimester; 21/80 (26%) had a FOB in the third trimester, 15 (19%) of whom also had a FOB in the first. Compared with the first trimester, 51/80 women showed an increase in FOBS score, with 14 scores increasing above and 8 scores decreasing below the cut-off of 54. FOBS scores were not correlated with salivary cortisol in either trimester (first trimester Spearman’s ρ=0.08, p=0.354, n=144; third trimester ρ=0.12, p=0.309, n=71) but they were correlated with PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores in the third trimester (PHQ-9 ρ=0.53, p=0.010, n=23; GAD-7 ρ=0.45, p=0.033, n=23) although not sufficiently high enough to demonstrate convergent validity against those measures of depression and anxiety. They were also associated with a previous history of depression but only in the first trimester (p=0.011). FOBS scores showed considerable variability and a high measurement error, indicating a need for further refinement and psychometric testing. ConclusionThe FOBS is a potentially effective way of measuring FOB in clinical practice and research, but it requires refining. Scores are not related to salivary cortisol levels but are correlated with validated scores for anxiety and depression. An enhanced version of the FOBS could be used in clinical practice to measure FOB.

Objective: The primary objective was to estimate the population prevalence of specific phobias (including pregnancy related specific phobias) and associated mental disorders. The secondary objective was to investigate the effectiveness of routinely collected screening tools (depression and anxiety screens, Whooley and GAD-2 respectively) in identifying specific phobias. Specific phobias are the most common anxiety disorder to occur during pregnancy, but studies on prevalence and clinical correlates of specific phobias, including pregnancy related specific phobias are lacking.Design: Cross-sectional survey using a two-phase sampling design stratified according to being positive or negative on the Whooley questions routinely asked by midwives. Approaching all whooley positive women and drawing a random sample of Whooley negative women. Sampling weights were used to account for the bias induced by the stratified sampling.Participants: 545 pregnant women attending their first antenatal appointment. Language interpreters were used where required. Setting: Inner-city maternity service, London, UK. Measurements: The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Mental Disorders were administered to assess mental disorders and 544 women responded to the anxiety module on specific phobias. Results: The maternity population prevalence estimate for specific phobias was 8.4% (95%CI: 5.8 – 12.1%) and for pregnancy related phobias was 1.5% (95%CI: 0.6 – 3.7%), most of which were needle phobias. The prevalence estimate of tokophobia was 0.032% (95%CI: 0.0044–0.23%). Over half (52.4%) the women with specific phobias had comorbid mental disorders. Routinely administered screening tools (Whooley and GAD-2) were not helpful in identifying phobias. Key conclusions and implications for practice: Phobias in pregnancy are common but pregnancy related phobias are rare, particularly tokophobia. As routinely administered screening tools were not helpful in identifying phobias, other indicators could be considered, such as avoidance of blood tests and requests for caesarean sections.

Background providing appropriate care for pregnant women with high or severe fear of childbirth (FOC) is a challenge in midwifery care today. FOC is associated with predisposing anamnestic factors, various sociodemographic and psychosocial characteristics, and may result in serious healthrelated consequences. It is therefore important to establish which interventions may increase a woman's faith in her own ability to cope with labour and birth. Aim to systematically identify and review studies examining interventions for relief of severe fear of childbirth in pregnancy and their underlying conceptual foundation. Methods a systematic literature search was performed following Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA Statement recommendations. Inclusion criteria were: studies including pregnant women diagnosed with high or severe FOC or who requested a caesarean section due to severe FOC, studies (regardless of design) observing the effect of an intervention addressing FOC, and studies published in English. Publications addressing anxiety or stress were excluded. 377 references were screened by title and abstract. The risk of bias was assessed. Findings 19 articles referring to 15 research projects were included in the analysis. The studies show heterogeneity regarding assessment methods, type, conceptualisation and application of interventions. There is evidence that both cognitive therapy sessions and a theory-based group psychoeducation with relaxation are effective interventions. Key conclusions despite methodological limitations, single or group psychoeducation sessions for nulliparous women or therapeutic conversation during pregnancy (in group or individual sessions) have the potential to strengthen women's self-efficacy and decrease the number of caesarean sections due to FOC. The theoretical validation of an intervention deepens the understanding of psychological processes in women coping with severe FOC. Implications for practice theory-based concepts of care for both antenatal and intrapartum support of pregnant women with high or severe FOC should be developed, piloted, tested, evaluated and implemented within the given healthcare system. Midwives need to be competent to address pregnant women's fears regarding labour and birth in antenatal care. The use of a valid assessment tool to identify the level of FOC in women, even if they do not raise the issue, is recommended in routine antenatal care so that appropriate expert support can be offered. A one-on-one conversation may be feasible for those women unwilling to fill in a questionnaire. Cooperative local networks between midwives, psychologists and obstetricians qualified in psychotherapy should be established to ensure timely and effective care for women with high or severe FOC.

Background research, conducted predominately in Scandinavian countries, suggests that a substantial number of women experience high levels of fear concerning childbirth which can impact on birth outcomes, the mother–infant relationship and the ongoing mental health of the mother. The prevalence of childbirth-related fear (CBRF) is not well known outside of the Nordic nations. This study aimed to examine the prevalence of CBRF in two rural populations (Sweden and Australia) and to pilot a short, easy-to-administer measurement tool. Methods a questionnaire assessing a range of childbirth-related issues was administered to women in the first trimester across two rural populations in Sweden ( n =386) and Australia ( n =123). CBRF was measured using the Fear of Birth Scale (FOBS) a two-item visual analogue scale. Findings close to 30% of women from the Australian and Swedish samples reported elevated levels of CBRF in the first trimester. A previous negative birth experience and less than positive attitudes to their current pregnancy and birth were predictive of high levels of fear. Swedish women with high levels of fear indicated a preference for caesarean section as the mode of birth in this pregnancy. A higher proportion (19%) of Australian women indicated that they would prefer an elective caesarean section, compared with only 8.8% of the Swedish sample; however, this was not related to high levels of fear. Preference for caesarean section was related to CBRF in the Swedish sample but not in the Australian sample. Conclusion the high proportion of women identified with CBRF suggests a need for monitoring of women during pregnancy, particularly those with a previous negative birth experience. The FOBS developed for this study could be used as a screening tool to identify women who require further investigation. Further cross-cultural research is needed to explore the role of fear in women's preference for caesarean section.