Evaluation of perinatal anxiety assessment measures: a cognitive interview study
Rose Meades,Andrea Sinesi,Louise R Williams,Amy Delicate,Helen Cheyne,Margaret Maxwell,Fiona Alderdice,Julie Jomeen,Judy Shakespeare,Cassandra Yuill,Susan Ayers,MAP Study Team,Catherine Best,Agnes Hann,Debra Salmon,Nazihah Uddin,James Walker,Simon Gilbody
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-024-06641-6
2024-07-27
Abstract:Background: Anxiety in pregnancy and postpartum is highly prevalent but under-recognised. To identify perinatal anxiety, assessment tools must be acceptable, relevant, and easy to use for women in the perinatal period. Methods: To determine the acceptability and ease of use of anxiety measures to pregnant or postpartum women (n = 41) we examined five versions of four measures: the Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD) 2-item and 7-item versions; Whooley questions; Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10); and Stirling Antenatal Anxiety Scale (SAAS). Cognitive interviews were used to examine ease of comprehension, judgement, retrieval and responding. Results: All measures were acceptable. Some items were deemed less relevant to the perinatal period e.g., difficulties sleeping. Ease of comprehension, judgement, retrieval and responding varied, with all measures having strengths and weaknesses. The SAAS and CORE-10 had the lowest mean number of problematic components. The GAD had the highest mean number of problematic components. Non-binary response options were preferred. Preferences for time frames (e.g. one week, one month) varied. Qualitative data provides in-depth information on responses to each measure. Conclusions: Findings can be used to inform clinical guidelines and research on acceptable anxiety assessment in pregnancy and after birth.