Author
Listed:
- Qing Mao
- Li‐xia Zhu
- Xiao‐yin Su
Abstract
Aims. This study aims to examine the differences in the prevalence of depression and related factors between new mothers and fathers during the postnatal period. Background. Although the transition to motherhood and postnatal depression has been extensively studied, few studies compared maternal and paternal psychological health during the postnatal period. Design. A cross‐sectional design was used. Methods. A total of 376 pairs of new parents participated in this study. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, the Perceived Stress Scale and the Social Support Rating Scale were used to measure depression, perceived stress and social support, respectively. We performed paired t‐test and multiple regression to analyse the data. Results. No significant difference in the prevalence of postnatal depression was found between the new mothers and fathers (14·9 vs. 12·5%). Fathers experienced similar stress levels as mothers did, while they received lower level of social support than mothers. Perceived stress, social support and partner’s Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score were significantly associated with depression for both mothers and fathers. Less sleeping time of infant and a tense relationship between mothers and mother‐in‐law were related to mothers’ depression. The preference for a male baby was associated with fathers’ depression. Conclusion. Both new mothers and fathers experienced postnatal depression in China. Relevance to clinical practice. Clinical nurses should pay attention to psychological health among new parents during postnatal period. Perinatal services, such as antenatal and postnatal education and counselling, should also be provided for fathers.
Suggested Citation
Qing Mao & Li‐xia Zhu & Xiao‐yin Su, 2011.
"A comparison of postnatal depression and related factors between Chinese new mothers and fathers,"
Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5‐6), pages 645-652, March.
Handle:
RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:5-6:p:645-652
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03542.x
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:5-6:p:645-652. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.