Analysis of related risk factors of mental health problems of women with spontaneous abortion

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.01.011

Objective

To explore the mental health problems of women with spontaneous abortion (SA) and analyze its related influencing factors.

Methods

A total of 130 women who were diagnosed as SA in the Department of Emergency of West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University from July 1 to December 31, 2021 were enrolled in the study. Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS), State Anxiety Scale (SAI), Perinatal Sadness Scale (PGS), Marriage Satisfaction Scale (DS) in Marriage Adaptation Scale (DAS) and Preskini Scale (PG) were used to evaluate the symptoms and degrees of depression. The general information, mental health problems (depression, anxiety and sadness), marriage and medical satisfaction of these 113 SA women were collected through questionnaires, and the related influencing factors were analyzed. The procedures followed in this study were in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association revised in 2013.

Results

① A total of 113 women with SA were included, of which 55.8% (63 / 113) had the possibility of depression (EPDS depression score ≥ 10 points), 43.36% (49 / 113) had obvious sadness (PGS sadness score>90 points), and the average score of SAI, DAS and PG were 31.7, 40.7, and 48.8 points. ②Spearman correlation analysis showed that EPDS depression score was positively correlated with SAI anxiety score (r=0.306, P=0.001). ③The results of univariate analysis were as follows. PGS score was statistically significant (P<0.05) compared with different educational qualifications, and the presence or absence of children, and SAI anxiety score of those who had SA once in the past was significantly higher than those who had SA twice or more, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The difference in EPDS depression score was statistically significant between the presence or absence of children and the planned future pregnancy (P<0.05). ④ The results of multiple linear regression analysis showed that childlessness and future pregnancy plans were the main risk factors for the increase of EPDS depression score, and advanced education (bachelor degree or above) and childlessness were the main risk factors for the increase of PGS sadness score.

Conclusions

Mental health problems are prevalent among SA women. Previous SA, childlessness, future pregnancy plans, and high education level are risk factors for the occurrence and aggravation of mental health problems in women with SA.

Key words: Psychoanalysis, Abortion, spontaneous, Depression, Anxiety, Grief, Women

表1 113例SA育龄女性的一般情况及各量表得分

项目	结果	项目	结果
年龄[岁，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	30.0(24.0，35.5)	末次SA发生时间[月，例数(%)]
最高学历[例数(%)]		≤6	27(23.9)
初中及以下	14(12.4)	6~12	54(47.8)
初中至本科	60(53.1)	≥12	32(28.3)
本科及以上	39(34.5)	有无子女[例数(%)]
工作性质[例数(%)]		有	45(39.8)
全职	33(29.2)	无	68(60.2)
兼职	45(39.8)	有无未来妊娠计划[例数(%)]
无业	35(30.9)	有	40(35.4)
家庭年收入[万元，例数(%)]		无	44(38.9)
≤8	27(23.9)	无明确计划	29(25.7)
8~30	52(46.0)	EPDS得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	41.0(35.0，46.5)
≥30	34(30.1)	SAI得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	51.0(43.5，56.5)
既往SA总次数[次，例数(%)]		PGS得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	11.0(7.0，11.0)
1	98(86.7)	DAS得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	33.0(26.0，37.0)
≥2	15(13.3)	PG得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	84.0(58.5，110.5)

表1 113例SA育龄女性的一般情况及各量表得分

项目	结果	项目	结果
年龄[岁，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	30.0(24.0，35.5)	末次SA发生时间[月，例数(%)]
最高学历[例数(%)]		≤6	27(23.9)
初中及以下	14(12.4)	6~12	54(47.8)
初中至本科	60(53.1)	≥12	32(28.3)
本科及以上	39(34.5)	有无子女[例数(%)]
工作性质[例数(%)]		有	45(39.8)
全职	33(29.2)	无	68(60.2)
兼职	45(39.8)	有无未来妊娠计划[例数(%)]
无业	35(30.9)	有	40(35.4)
家庭年收入[万元，例数(%)]		无	44(38.9)
≤8	27(23.9)	无明确计划	29(25.7)
8~30	52(46.0)	EPDS得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	41.0(35.0，46.5)
≥30	34(30.1)	SAI得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	51.0(43.5，56.5)
既往SA总次数[次，例数(%)]		PGS得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	11.0(7.0，11.0)
1	98(86.7)	DAS得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	33.0(26.0，37.0)
≥2	15(13.3)	PG得分[分，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	84.0(58.5，110.5)

表2 各因素与SA育龄女性精神健康问题的Spearman相关性分析

项目	DAS婚姻满意度		PG就医满意度		EPDS抑郁评分		SAI焦虑评分		PGS悲伤评分
项目	r	P	r	P	r	P	r	P	r	P
年龄	0.162	0.087	0.089	0.351	－0.013	0.889	0.017	0.859	－0.120	0.206
DAS婚姻满意度	—	—	0.016	0.869	－0.141	0.137	0.113	0.233	－0.017	0.859
PG就医满意度	—	—	—	—	－0.065	0.496	0.102	0.281	0.158	0.094
EPDS抑郁评分	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.306	0.001	－0.065	0.497
SAI焦虑评分	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	－0.086	0.364

表2 各因素与SA育龄女性精神健康问题的Spearman相关性分析

项目	DAS婚姻满意度		PG就医满意度		EPDS抑郁评分		SAI焦虑评分		PGS悲伤评分
项目	r	P	r	P	r	P	r	P	r	P
年龄	0.162	0.087	0.089	0.351	－0.013	0.889	0.017	0.859	－0.120	0.206
DAS婚姻满意度	—	—	0.016	0.869	－0.141	0.137	0.113	0.233	－0.017	0.859
PG就医满意度	—	—	—	—	－0.065	0.496	0.102	0.281	0.158	0.094
EPDS抑郁评分	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.306	0.001	－0.065	0.497
SAI焦虑评分	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	－0.086	0.364

表3 不同个体情况SA育龄女性的EPDS、SAI、PGS 3项量表总分比较(分)]

指标	例数	EPDS抑郁评分		SAI焦虑评分		PGS悲伤评分
指标	例数	±s	统计值	±s或M(Q₁, Q₃)	统计值	±s	统计值
最高学历
初中及以下	14	10.6±5.8	F＝1.299	28.9±6.8	F＝1.107	76.6±23.2	F＝3.883
初中至本科	60	10.9±6.6	P＝0.277	32.1±7.0	P＝0.334	79.2±27.4	P＝0.023 ^a
本科及以上	39	12.9±6.9		31.9±8.0		94.3±31.3
工作性质
全职	33	11.6±6.9	F＝0.085	30.9±8.1	F＝1.373	93.1±31.0	F＝2.308
兼职	45	11.4±6.4	P＝0.919	30.9±7.2	P＝0.258	79.8±27.8	P＝0.104
无业	35	11.9±6.9		33.4±6.8		81.1±27.8
家庭年收入(×10⁴元)
≤8	27	13.3±7.4	F＝1.232	32.3±7.2	F＝1.388	74.6±27.5	F＝2.010
8~30	52	11.3±6.4	P＝0.296	32.5±8.2	P＝0.254	88.1±28.0	P＝0.139
≥30	34	10.7±6.2		29.9±5.9		85.4±31.0
末次SA距本次调查时间(月)
≤6	27	11.3±6.3	F＝0.408	32.1±7.8	F＝0.100	85.5±32.6	F＝0.106
6~12	54	11.2±6.4	P＝0.666	31.7±7.6	P＝0.905	84.5±29.0	P＝0.900
≥12	32	12.5±7.4		31.2±6.8		82.2±26.7
既往SA总次数(次)
1	98	11.8±6.8	t＝0.710	37(31，42)	Z＝－2.039	85.2±28.3	t＝－1.070
≥2	15	10.5±5.8	P＝0.479	28(23，33)	P＝0.041	76.6±33.9	P＝0.287
有无子女
有	45	9.4±6.9	t＝2.902	30.0±7.4	t＝1.924	71.2±27.1	t＝4.081
无	68	13.0±6.1	P＝0.004^*	32.7±7.2	P＝0.057	92.6±27.3	P<0.001
未来有无妊娠计划
有	40	14.2±6.0	F＝5.144	33.3±8.8	F＝1.512	85.6±34.1	F＝1.466
无	44	10.5±6.6	P＝0.007 ^b	30.9±6.7	P＝0.225	78.7±27.5	P＝0.235
无明确计划	29	9.7±6.7		30.6±6.0		90.2±22.7

表3 不同个体情况SA育龄女性的EPDS、SAI、PGS 3项量表总分比较(分)]

指标	例数	EPDS抑郁评分		SAI焦虑评分		PGS悲伤评分
指标	例数	±s	统计值	±s或M(Q₁, Q₃)	统计值	±s	统计值
最高学历
初中及以下	14	10.6±5.8	F＝1.299	28.9±6.8	F＝1.107	76.6±23.2	F＝3.883
初中至本科	60	10.9±6.6	P＝0.277	32.1±7.0	P＝0.334	79.2±27.4	P＝0.023 ^a
本科及以上	39	12.9±6.9		31.9±8.0		94.3±31.3
工作性质
全职	33	11.6±6.9	F＝0.085	30.9±8.1	F＝1.373	93.1±31.0	F＝2.308
兼职	45	11.4±6.4	P＝0.919	30.9±7.2	P＝0.258	79.8±27.8	P＝0.104
无业	35	11.9±6.9		33.4±6.8		81.1±27.8
家庭年收入(×10⁴元)
≤8	27	13.3±7.4	F＝1.232	32.3±7.2	F＝1.388	74.6±27.5	F＝2.010
8~30	52	11.3±6.4	P＝0.296	32.5±8.2	P＝0.254	88.1±28.0	P＝0.139
≥30	34	10.7±6.2		29.9±5.9		85.4±31.0
末次SA距本次调查时间(月)
≤6	27	11.3±6.3	F＝0.408	32.1±7.8	F＝0.100	85.5±32.6	F＝0.106
6~12	54	11.2±6.4	P＝0.666	31.7±7.6	P＝0.905	84.5±29.0	P＝0.900
≥12	32	12.5±7.4		31.2±6.8		82.2±26.7
既往SA总次数(次)
1	98	11.8±6.8	t＝0.710	37(31，42)	Z＝－2.039	85.2±28.3	t＝－1.070
≥2	15	10.5±5.8	P＝0.479	28(23，33)	P＝0.041	76.6±33.9	P＝0.287
有无子女
有	45	9.4±6.9	t＝2.902	30.0±7.4	t＝1.924	71.2±27.1	t＝4.081
无	68	13.0±6.1	P＝0.004^*	32.7±7.2	P＝0.057	92.6±27.3	P<0.001
未来有无妊娠计划
有	40	14.2±6.0	F＝5.144	33.3±8.8	F＝1.512	85.6±34.1	F＝1.466
无	44	10.5±6.6	P＝0.007 ^b	30.9±6.7	P＝0.225	78.7±27.5	P＝0.235
无明确计划	29	9.7±6.7		30.6±6.0		90.2±22.7

表4 基于EPDS抑郁量表与PGS悲伤量表评分的SA育龄女性精神健康问题相关危险因素的多重线性回归分析

因变量	自变量	偏回归系数	偏回归系数标准误	标准化偏回归系数	偏回归系数95%CI	t值	P值
EPDS抑郁评分	有无子女(vs有子女)	3.045	1.219	0.226	0.628~5.462	2.497	0.014
	有无未来妊娠计划(vs无明确计划)
	有	4.367	1.529	0.316	1.335~7.400	2.855	0.005
	无	1.012	1.503	0.075	－1.967~3.992	0.674	0.502
PGS悲伤评分	最高学历(vs初中及以下)
	初中至本科	6.637	8.094	0.114	9.410~22.683	0.820	0.414
	本科及以上	18.578	8.339	0.305	2.044~35.111	2.228	0.028
	有无子女(vs有子女)	19.391	5.208	0.328	9.066~29.716	3.723	<0.001

表4 基于EPDS抑郁量表与PGS悲伤量表评分的SA育龄女性精神健康问题相关危险因素的多重线性回归分析

因变量	自变量	偏回归系数	偏回归系数标准误	标准化偏回归系数	偏回归系数95%CI	t值	P值
EPDS抑郁评分	有无子女(vs有子女)	3.045	1.219	0.226	0.628~5.462	2.497	0.014
	有无未来妊娠计划(vs无明确计划)
	有	4.367	1.529	0.316	1.335~7.400	2.855	0.005
	无	1.012	1.503	0.075	－1.967~3.992	0.674	0.502
PGS悲伤评分	最高学历(vs初中及以下)
	初中至本科	6.637	8.094	0.114	9.410~22.683	0.820	0.414
	本科及以上	18.578	8.339	0.305	2.044~35.111	2.228	0.028
	有无子女(vs有子女)	19.391	5.208	0.328	9.066~29.716	3.723	<0.001

[1]	自然流产诊治中国专家共识编写组. 自然流产诊治中国专家共识(2020年版)[J]．中国实用妇科与产科杂志，2020，36(11): 1082-1090. DOI: 10.19538/j.fk2020110113.
[2]	Ye HX, Liao GN, Dong YJ, et al. miR-146a-5p enhances embryo survival in unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion by promoting M2 polarization of decidual macrophages[J]. Int Immunopharmacol, 2022, 110: 108930. DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2022.108930.
[3]	Davoudian T, Gibbins K, Cirino NH. Perinatal Loss: The Impact on Maternal Mental Health[J]. Obstet Gynecol Surv, 2021, 76(4): 223. DOI: 10.1097/OGX.0000000000000874.
[4]	Galeotti M, Mitchell G, Tomlinson M, et al. Factors affecting the emotional wellbeing of women and men who experience miscarriage in hospital settings: a scoping review[J]. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2022, 22(1): 270. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-022-04585-3.
[5]	Farren J, Jalmbrant M, Falconieri N, et al. Posttraumatic stress, anxiety and depression following miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy: a multicenter, prospective, cohort study[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2020, 222(4): 367. e1-367. e22. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.10.102.
[6]	deMontigny F, Verdon C, Meunier S, et al. Protective and risk factors for women′s mental health after a spontaneous abortion[J]. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem, 2020, 28: e3350. DOI: 10.1590/1518-8345.3382.3350.
[7]	Tseng YF, Cheng HR, Chen YP, et al. Grief reactions of couples to perinatal loss: a one-year prospective follow-up[J]. J Clin Nurs, 2017, 26(23-24): 5133-5142. DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14059.
[8]	Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale[J]. Br J Psychiatry, 1987, 150: 782-786. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.150.6.782.
[9]	Toedter LJ, Lasker JN, Janssen HJ. International comparison of studies using the perinatal grief scale: a decade of research on pregnancy loss[J]. Death Stud, 2001, 25(3): 205-228. DOI: 10.1080/07481180125971.
[10]	王颖，王玉琼，郭秀静，等. 孕晚期妇女婚姻适应调查[J/OL]．中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)，2010, 6(6): 417-420. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2010.06.007.
[11]	秦峰，李丽娟，肖利军，等. 孕产期心身障碍临床路径(2017版)[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)，2017，13 (6): 640-644. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2017.06.004.
[12]	Lanes A, Kuk JL, Tamim H. Prevalence and characteristics of postpartum depression symptomatology among Canadian women: a cross-sectional study[J]. BMC Public Health, 2011, 11: 302. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-302.
[13]	Chojenta C, Harris S, Reilly N, et al. History of pregnancy loss increases the risk of mental health problems in subsequent pregnancies but not in the postpartum[J]. PLoS One, 2014, 9(4): e95038. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095038.
[14]	Lee C, Rowlands IJ. When mixed methods produce mixed results: integrating disparate findings about miscarriage and women′s wellbeing[J]. Br J Health Psychol, 2015, 20(1): 36-44. DOI: 10.1111/bjhp.12121.
[15]	Lok IH, Yip AS, Lee DT, et al. A 1-year longitudinal study of psychological morbidity after miscarriage[J]. Fertil Steril, 2010, 93(6): 1966-1975. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.12.048.
[16]	Emond T, de Montigny F, Guillaumie L. Exploring the needs of parents who experience miscarriage in the emergency department: a qualitative study with parents and nurses[J]. J Clin Nurs, 2019, 28(9-10): 1952-1965. DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14780.
[17]	Baird S, Gagnon MD, deFiebre G, et al. Women′s experiences with early pregnancy loss in the emergency room: a qualitative study[J]. Sex Reprod Healthc, 2018, 16: 113-117. DOI: 10.1016/j.srhc.2018.03.001.
[18]	Whisman MA, Bruce ML. Marital dissatisfaction and incidence of major depressive episode in a community sample[J]. J Abnorm Psychol, 1999, 108(4): 674-678. DOI: 10.1037//0021-843x.108.4.674.

[1]	Jingyu Qian, Mingming Zheng. Interpretation of the Italian guidelines on non-invasive and invasive prenatal diagnosis：executive summary of recommendations for practice the Italian Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology（SIGO）[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 486-492.
[2]	Xialin Li, Fang He. Risk assessment and early warning system for postpartum hemorrhage[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 498-503.
[3]	Ziyang Liu, Jianjian Cui, Yin Zhao. Current research status on obstetric disseminated intravascular coagulation and its scoring system[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 511-518.
[4]	Fanying Zeng, Jie Ruan, Xinghui Liu, Guolin He. Current status of perinatal medicine advances under the new reproductive situation and coping strategies in prenatal care[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 519-524.
[5]	Xiaofei Li, Hongli Liu, Qiuling Shi, Jing Tian, Li Li, Hongbo Qi, Xin Luo. A prospective randomized controlled study of low intensity focused ultrasound uterine involution treatment for prevention and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage in natural childbirth women[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 534-539.
[6]	Rong Huang, Ziyu Liang, Wenjin Qi. Expression and significance of NLRP3 inflammasome in serum of pregnant women with premature rupture of membranes[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 540-548.
[7]	Xia He, Rong Huang, Wenjin Qi. High-throughput sequencing study on the abundance of placenta and fetal membrane flora in pregnant women with premature rupture of membranes[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 549-555.
[8]	Jiangyan Xie, Yafei Wang, Fang He. Pregnancy complicated with thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura：two cases report and literature review[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 556-563.
[9]	Xidong Zhang, Hejie Jia, Rui Feng, Luya Li, Yongzhi Qiao, Ying Zheng. Factors influencing anxiety in family members of emergency patients[J]. Chinese Journal of Stomatological Research(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(05): 319-324.
[10]	Ling Li, Ya Liu, Peiling Li, Xiumin Zhang, Ping Li. Study on the relationship between postoperative intestinal flora and depression in patients with rectal cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(06): 607-610.
[11]	Jinhong Gao, Yumei Chen, Yun Guo. Application effect analysis of psychological counseling based on King interactive reaching theory in patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatocellular carcinoma resection[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(05): 517-520.
[12]	Chenyang Du, Yong Wang, Xin Duan, Wenjie Ke, Nian Shi, Yingxiang Wu, Wen Luo. Analysis of risk factors for dysphagia after laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(05): 523-527.
[13]	Ling Wang, Wenbin Fan, Jiachun Ni, Zengjin Cai. Research progress of functional constipation and anxiety and depression comorbidity[J]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2024, 13(05): 411-416.
[14]	Jie Bai, Weiyi Wang, Chao Chen, Fan Wang, Xinru Xiao. Occupational burnout among neurosurgery residents and its influencing factors[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(07): 662-670.
[15]	Lina Wang, Shuxia Lyu, Yanan Li. Correlation analysis of metacognition of health anxiety between disease acceptance and fear disease progression in stroke patients with hemiplegia[J]. Chinese Journal of Cerebrovascular Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(05): 434-440.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export