Predicting grief intensity after recent perinatal loss

Predicting grief intensity after recent perinatal loss

Hutti MH; Myers J; Hall LA; Polivka BJ; White S; Hill J; Kloenne E; Hayden J; Grisanti MM

10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.07.016

Journal of Psychosomatic Research

2017

Miscarriage; Neonatal Death; Perinatal Grief Screening Instrument; Stillbirth

OBJECTIVE: The Perinatal Grief Intensity Scale (PGIS) was developed for clinical use to identify and predict intense grief and need for follow-up after perinatal loss. This study evaluates the validity of the PGIS via its ability to predict future intense grief based on a PGIS score obtained early after a loss. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted with 103 international, English-speaking women recruited at hospital discharge or via the internet who experienced a miscarriage, stillbirth, or neonatal death within the previous 8weeks. Survey data were collected at baseline using the PGIS and the Perinatal Grief Scale (PGS). Follow-up data on the PGS were obtained 3months later. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Cronbach's alpha, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis. RESULTS: Cronbach's alphas were >/=0.70 for both instruments. PGIS factor analysis yielded three factors as predicted, explaining 57.7% of the variance. The optimal cutoff identified for the PGIS was 3.535. No difference was found when the ability of the PGIS to identify intense grief was compared to the PGS (p=0.754). The PGIS was not inferior to the PGS (AUC=0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.88, p<0.001) in predicting intense grief at the follow-up. A PGIS score>/=3.53 at baseline was associated with increased grief intensity at Time 2 (PGS: OR=1.97, 95% CI 1.59-2.34, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The PGIS is comparable to the PGS, has a lower response burden, and can reliably and validly predict women who may experience future intense grief associated with perinatal loss.

Article information provided for research and reference use only. PedPalASCNET does not hold any rights over the resource listed here. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).

November 2017 List