We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The COVID-19 pandemic has affected perinatal mental health. Reliable tools are needed to assess perinatal stress during pandemic situations.
Aims
To assess the psychometric properties of the Greek versions of the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale (PREPS) and the Pandemic-Related Postpartum Stress Scale (PREPS-PP) and to explore the associations between women's characteristics and perinatal stress during the second pandemic wave.
Methods
The PREPS and PREPS-PP were completed by 264 pregnant and 188 postpartum women, respectively, who also completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the Edinburgh Perinatal Depression Scale (EPDS).
Results
The internal consistency was similar for PREPS and PREPS-PP. It was good for preparedness stress (a = 0.77 and α = 0.71, respectively) and infection stress (α = 0.83 for both scales) but low for positive appraisal (α = 0.46 and α = 0.41, respectively). Of the pregnant women, 55.33% and 55.27%, respectively, reported scores of ≥40 on STAI-S and STAI-T, and the respective percentages for the postpartum women were 47.34% and 46.80%. In addition, 14.39% of the pregnant women and 20.74% of the postpartum women scored ≥13 on the EPDS. Higher preparedness stress on PREPS and PREPS-PP was associated with primiparity (P = 0.022 and P = 0.021, respectively) and disrupted perinatal care (P = 0.069 and P = 0.007, respectively). In postpartum women, higher infection stress was associated with chronic disease (P = 0.037), primiparity (P = 0.02) and perceived risk of infection (P = 0.065). Higher score on infection stress was associated with disrupted perinatal care in both groups (P = 0.107 and P = 0.010, respectively).
Conclusions
The Greek versions of PREPS and PREPS-PP are valid tools for the assessment of women at risk of perinatal stress during a health crisis.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.