4.7 Article

A 1-year longitudinal study of psychological morbidity after miscarriage

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 93, Issue 6, Pages 1966-1975

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.12.048

Keywords

Miscarriage; psychological distress; depression; GHQ-12; BDI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To examine the 1-year longitudinal course of psychological outcomes after miscarriage. Design: Longitudinal observational study. Setting: University-affiliated teaching hospital. Patient(s): 280 miscarrying women and 150 nonpregnant women. Intervention(s): Psychological outcomes were assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) immediately, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after miscarriage. Main Outcome Measure(s): Scores on GHQ-12 and BDI. Result(s): Half (55%) of the miscarrying women scored high ( >= 4) on the GHQ-12 immediately, 25% at 3 months; 17.8% at 6 months, and 10.8% at 1 year after miscarriage; 26.8% of the patients scored high on the BDI ( >= 12) immediately, 18.4% at 3 months, 16.4% at 6 months, and 9.3% at 1 year after miscarriage. Patients who were initially more distressed continued to score higher on both the GHQ-12 and the BDI along the 1-year course when compared with those who were initially less distressed. When compared with the nonpregnant controls, the miscarrying women scored statistically significantly higher on the GHQ-12 and BDI; the differences became not statistically significant only I year after miscarriage. Conclusion(s): A statistically significant proportion of patients reported psychological morbidity shortly after miscarriage, but their level of distress reduced over time until they were comparable with the controls 1 year later. Patients who were initially more distressed continued to be throughout the 1-year course. (Fertil Steril (R) 2010;93:1966-75. (C)2010 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available