Top

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Anxiety | Research article

Psychometric adequacy of the Persian adapted version of the Tilburg pregnancy distress scale (P-TPDS)

Authors: Leili Salehi, Zoherh Mohmoodi, Fatemeh Rajati, Victor Pop

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Pregnancy distress is a combination of anxiety, stress, and depression during pregnancy. The first step in preventing pregnancy distress is to identify women at risk. The present study assessed adaptation and psychometric adequency of the Persian Adapted Version of Tilburg Pregnancy Distress Scale (P-TPDS).

Methods

By Brislin’s translation guidelines, TPDS was translated to Persian. This was followed by determining the face validity of P-TPDS and evaluating construct validity using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to estimate reliability.

Results

A final 16-item scale was loaded on four distinct constructs jointly accounting for 59.62% of variance. The factors were labelled as delivery-related worries, partner involvement, pregnancy-related worries, and social-related worries. The alpha coefficients for P-TPDS subscales ranged from 0.85 to 0.91 and ICC ranged from 0.70 to 0.77. All comparative indices of the model including CFI, IFI, NFI, and NNFI were above 0.9 showing the goodness of fit for the data with a RMSEA of 0.04, lower bound: 0.038.

Conclusions

The Persian adapted version of TPDS (P-TPDS) is a reliable and valid scale for assessing pregnancy distress among pregnant women in Iran.

Available only for authorised users

Morrell CJ, Cantrell A, Evans K, Carrick-Sen DM. A review of instruments to measure health related quality of life and well-being among pregnant women. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2013;31(5):512–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2013.835795.CrossRef

Emmanuel E, St John W. Maternal distress: a concept analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2010;66(9):2104–15.PubMed

Nilsson C, Hessman E, Sjöblom H, Dencker A, Jangsten E, Mollberg M, et al. Definitions, measurements and prevalence of fear of childbirth: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;18(1):1–15.CrossRef

Pop VJ, Pommer AM, Pop-Purceleanu M, Wijnen HA, Bergink V, Pouwer F. Development of the Tilburg pregnancy distress scale: the TPDS. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2011;11(1):80. Available from: http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-11-80.

Furber CM, Garrod D, Maloney E, Lovell K, McGowan L. A qualitative study of mild to moderate psychological distress during pregnancy. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46(5):669–77.CrossRef

Gavin NI, Gaynes BN, Lohr KN, Meltzer-Brody S, Gartlehner G, Swinson T. Perinatal depression: a systematic review of prevalence and incidence. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(5, Part 1):1071–83 Available from: http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid = WKPTLP:landingpage&an = 00006250–200,511,000–00027.CrossRef

Bennett HA, Einarson A, Taddio A, Koren G, Einarson TR. Prevalence of depression during pregnancy: systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103(4):698–709.CrossRef

Underwood L, Waldie K, D’Souza S, Peterson ER, Morton S. A review of longitudinal studies on antenatal and postnatal depression. Arch Womens Ment Health 2016;19(5):711–720. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-016-0629-1

Woody CA, Ferrari AJ, Siskind DJ, Whiteford HA, Harris MG. A systematic review and meta-regression of the prevalence and incidence of perinatal depression. J Affect Disord 2017;219(May):86–92. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.05.003

10.

Dennis CL, Falah-Hassani K, Shiri R. Prevalence of antenatal and postnatal anxiety: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry. 2017;210(5):315–23.CrossRef

11.

Ҁapik A, Pasinliogu T. Validity and reliability study of the Tilburg pregnancy distress scale in Turkish version. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2015;22:260–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.12211.CrossRef

12.

Fntein-Kuipers Y. Reducing maternal anxiety and stress in pregnancy: what is the best approach? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2015;27(2):128–32. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000155.CrossRef

13.

Green JM, Kafetsios K, Statham HE, Snowdone C. Factor structure, validity and reliability of the Cambridge worry scale in a pregnant population. J Health Psychol. 2003;8:753–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053030086008.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Yali AM, Lobel M. Coping and distress in pregnancy: an investigation of medically high-risk women. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol. 1999;20:39–52. https://doi.org/10.3109/01674829909075575.CrossRef

15.

Ingstrup KG, Schou Andersen C, Ajslev TA, Pedersen P, Sørensen TI, Nohr EA. Maternal distress during pregnancy and offspring childhood overweight. J Obes. 2012;2012:462845. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/462845.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Van den Bergh BRH. The influence of maternal emotions during pregnancy on fetal and neonatal behavior. J Prenat Perinat Psychol Health. 1990;5(2):119–30.

17.

Huizink AC, Delforterie MJ, Scheinin NM, Tolvanen M, Karlsson L, Karlsson H. Adaption of pregnancy anxiety questionnaire-revised for all pregnant women regardless of parity: PRAQ-R. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2016;19(1):125–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-015-0531-2.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Volpato LK, Siqueira DC, Nunes RD, Ghizzo Filho J, Traebert J. Transcultural adaptation and validation of the Tilburg pregnancy distress scale (TPDS) in the Brazilian cultural context. Midwifery. 2019;75:97–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2019.04.012.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Boekhorst MGBM, Beerthuizen A, Van Son M, Bergink V, Pop VJM. Psychometric aspects of the Tilburg pregnancy distress scale: data from the HAPPY study. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-019-00974-4.

20.

Jones PS, Lee JW, Phillips LR, Zhang XE, Jaceldo KB. An adaptation of Brislin’s translation model for cross-cultural research. Nurses. 2001;50(5):300–4.

21.

Bujang MA, Baharum N. A simplified guide to determination of sample size requirements for estimating the value of intraclass correlation coefficient: a review. Arch Orofac Sci. 2017;12(1):1–11.

22.

Tsang S, Royse CF, Terkawi AS. Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in peri operative and pain medicine. Saudi J Anaesth. 2017;11(Suppl 1):S80–9. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_203_17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Shoukri MM, Asyali MH, Donner A. Sample size requirements for the design of reliability study: review and new results. Stat Methods Med Res. 2004;13(4):251–71. https://doi.org/10.1191/0962280204sm365ra.CrossRef

24.

Houser J. Precision, reliability, and validity: essential elements of measurement in nursing research. J Spec Pediatr Nurs. 2008;13(4):297–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6155.2008.00171.x.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, van Poppel MN, Chinapaw MJ, van Mechelen W, de Vet HC. Qualitative attributes and measurement properties of physical activity questionnaires: a checklist. Sports Med. 2010;40:525–37. https://doi.org/10.2165/11531370-000000000-00000.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression: development of the 10-item Edinburgh postnatal depression scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150(JUNE):782–6.CrossRef

27.

Bergink V, Kooistra L, Lambregtse-van den Berg MP, Wijnen H, Bunevicius R, van Baar A, et al. Validation of the Edinburgh depression scale during pregnancy. J Psychosom Res. 2011;70(4):385–389. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.07.008

28.

O’Conner E, Rossen RC, Henniger M, Groom HC, Bura BU. Primary care screening for and tra Eatment of depressiion in pregnant and postpartum womwn (Evidence report and systematic review for the US preventive service force). JAMA. 2016;315(4):388–406.CrossRef

29.

Jomeen J. The importance of assessing psychological status during pregnancy childbirth and the postnatal period as a multidimensional construct: a literature review. J Nurs. 2004;8:143–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cein.2005.02.001.CrossRef

30.

Mazhari S, Nakhai N. Validation of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale in an Iranian sample. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2007;10(6):293–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-007-0204-x.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Karamoozian M, Askarizadeh G, Behroozy N. The study of psychometric properties of pregnancy related anxiety questionnaire. J Clin Nurs Midwifery. 2017;5(4):22–34.

32.

Bentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull. 1990;107(2):238.CrossRef

33.

Dadipoor S, Madani A, Alavi A, Roozbeh N, Safari MA. A survey of the growing trend of caesarian section in Iran and the world: a review article. Iran J Obstet Gynecol Infertility. 2016;19(27):8–17.

34.

Amiri Farahani L, Abbasi Shavazi MJ. Caesarean section changes trends in Iran and Some demographic factors associated with them in the past three decades. J Fasa Univ Med Sci. 2012;2(3):127–34.

35.

Pallant JF. Development and validation of a scale to measure perceived control of internal states. J Pers Assess. 2000;75(2):308–37. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7502_10.

36.

Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:53–5. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd.

37.

Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford: Guilford publications; 2015.

38.

Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage Focus Editions. 1993;154:136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005.

Title: Psychometric adequacy of the Persian adapted version of the Tilburg pregnancy distress scale (P-TPDS)
Authors: Leili Salehi
Zoherh Mohmoodi
Fatemeh Rajati
Victor Pop
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keyword: Anxiety
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03745-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Psychometric adequacy of the Persian adapted version of the Tilburg pregnancy distress scale (P-TPDS)

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Anemia among pregnant women in internally displaced camps in Mogadishu, Somalia: a cross-sectional study on prevalence, severity and associated risk factors

Age-specific definition of low anti-Mullerian hormone and associated pregnancy outcome in women undergoing IVF treatment

The acceptability to women of techniques for managing an impacted fetal head at caesarean section and of randomised trials evaluating those techniques: a qualitative study

Differences in pregnancy and perinatal outcomes among symptomatic versus asymptomatic COVID-19-infected pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Adverse childhood experiences are associated with illicit drug use among pregnant women with middle to high socioeconomic status: findings from the All Our Families Cohort

Determinants of childbirth care quality along the care continuum in limited resource settings: A structural equation modeling analysis of cross-sectional data from Burkina Faso and Côte d’Ivoire