Pregnancy-specific coping and changes in emotional distress from mid- to late pregnancy

ABSTRACT

Objective: To examine whether pregnancy-specific coping predicts changes in emotional distress from mid- to late pregnancy.

Background: There is a need to identify ways of coping that reduce or elevate emotional distress in pregnant women as such distress increases the risk of adverse birth outcomes.

Methods: 132 women receiving prenatal care from a university hospital midwifery practice were recruited prior to 25 weeks gestation (M = 19.58, SD = 5.14). The state anxiety version of the State–Trait Personality Inventory (STPI) and the Revised Prenatal Distress Questionnaire (NuPDQ) were administered in mid- (M = 25.7 weeks, SD = 4.55) and late (M = 33.4 weeks, SD = 4.18) pregnancy and the Revised Prenatal Coping Inventory (NuPCI) at the latter timepoint.

Results: Factor analysis of the NuPCI identified five distinct, conceptually interpretable types of coping: Prayer/Spirituality, Receiving Social Support, Planning/Preparation, Positive Appraisal, and Avoidant Coping. Avoidant Coping was used least frequently and Positive Appraisal was used most. The STPI and NuPDQ were aggregated to create a measure of emotional distress. After controlling for mid-pregnancy distress, Avoidant Coping predicted greater emotional distress in late pregnancy (β = .18, R² = .61, p < .01) and Positive Appraisal predicted lower late pregnancy distress (β = −.15, R² = .60, p < .01).

Conclusion: This is one of the first studies to demonstrate that specific ways of coping with stress during pregnancy predict changes in pregnant women’s emotional distress. The NuPCI is a psychometrically sound self-report instrument to examine coping and its association with emotional distress.

KEYWORDS:

• Pregnancy
• coping
• distress
• stress
• midwifery

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Todd Griffin, Elizabeth Roemer, Elsa Singh, Ellie Sotomayer and all of the midwives and study participants who made this research possible, and to Bonita London for her helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone were responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded in part by a grant from the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues [Project #1109640].