Depressive symptoms during pregnancy and their risk factors – a cross-sectional study
Abstract
Introduction. It was established that intragestational depression is a common disease, with the estimated average prevalence of 10–25% in all expectant mothers worldwide.
Aim. The aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency of depressive symptoms in pregnant women in Poland and to identify which factors may be related to a higher risk of depressive symptoms during pregnancy.
Material and methods. A prospective cross-sectional study was performed. Depressive symptoms were assessed with the validated Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). 346 women were enrolled in the study.
Results. 130 women (37.6%) scored 13 or more points and were considered as presenting with depressive symptoms. Independent risk factors of depressive symptoms during pregnancy including mood disorders diagnosed before the current pregnancy (aOR=2.68, 95%CI 1.37-5.22), mental disorders confirmed in family members (aOR=2.72, 95%CI 1.24-5.98), unhappiness in their current relationship (aOR=4.0, 95%CI 1.77-9.01), lack of support from family members (aOR=2.73, 95%CI 1.51-4.96) increased the risk of DS and good financial status decreased the risk of DS occurrence (aOR=0.45, 95%CI: 0.25-0.80).
Conclusions. Pregnant women commonly report depressive symptoms. The evaluation of relations with the family members, socio-economic status, former depressive symptoms and possible prenatal depression are essential for proper screening of depression in pregnant women.
Cite
Feduniw S, Płaza O, Paździor D, Kosińska-Kaczyńska K, Szymusik I, Wielgoś M. Depressive symptoms during pregnancy and their risk factors – a cross-sectional study. Eur J Clin Exp Med. 2020;18(1):10–15. doi: 10.15584/ejcem.2020.1.2
![](http://www.ejcem.ur.edu.pl/sites/default/files/icons/creative.png)
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited