Cargando…

Comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using EPDS in US community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND: Preventing postpartum depression (PPD) is the most common self-reported motivation for human maternal placentophagy, yet very little systematic research has assessed mental health following placenta consumption. Our aim was to compare PPD screening scores of placenta consumers and non-co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Benyshek, Daniel C., Bovbjerg, Marit L., Cheyney, Melissa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10362633/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37481527
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05852-7
_version_ 1785076468111376384
author Benyshek, Daniel C.
Bovbjerg, Marit L.
Cheyney, Melissa
author_facet Benyshek, Daniel C.
Bovbjerg, Marit L.
Cheyney, Melissa
author_sort Benyshek, Daniel C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Preventing postpartum depression (PPD) is the most common self-reported motivation for human maternal placentophagy, yet very little systematic research has assessed mental health following placenta consumption. Our aim was to compare PPD screening scores of placenta consumers and non-consumers in a community birth setting, using propensity score matching to address anticipated extensive confounding. METHODS: We used a medical records-based data set (n = 6038) containing pregnancy, birth, and postpartum information for US women who planned and completed community births. We first compared PPD screening scores as measured by the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS) of individuals who consumed their placenta to those who did not, with regard to demographics, pregnancy characteristics, and history of mental health challenges. Matching placentophagic (n = 1876) and non-placentophagic (n = 1876) groups were then created using propensity scores. The propensity score model included more than 90 variables describing medical and obstetric history, demographics, pregnancy characteristics, and intrapartum and postpartum complications, thus addressing confounding by all of these variables. We then used logistic regression to compare placentophagic to non-placentophagic groups based on commonly-cited EPDS cutoff values (≥ 11; ≥ 13) for likely PPD. RESULTS: In the unmatched and unadjusted analysis, placentophagy was associated with an increased risk of PPD. In the matched sample, 9.9% of women who ate their placentas reported EPDS ≥ 11, compared to 8.4% of women who did not (5.5% and 4.8%, respectively, EPDS ≥ 13 or greater). After controlling for over 90 variables (including prior mental health challenges) in the matched and adjusted analysis, placentophagy was associated with an increased risk of PPD between 15 and 20%, depending on the published EPDS cutoff point used. Numerous sensitivity analyses did not alter this general finding. CONCLUSIONS: Placentophagic individuals in our study scored higher on an EPDS screening than carefully matched non-placentophagic controls. Why placentophagic women score higher on the EPDS remains unclear, but we suspect reverse causality plays an important role. Future research could assess psychosocial factors that may motivate some individuals to engage in placentophagy, and that may also indicate greater risk of PPD. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-023-05852-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10362633
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103626332023-07-23 Comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using EPDS in US community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis Benyshek, Daniel C. Bovbjerg, Marit L. Cheyney, Melissa BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research BACKGROUND: Preventing postpartum depression (PPD) is the most common self-reported motivation for human maternal placentophagy, yet very little systematic research has assessed mental health following placenta consumption. Our aim was to compare PPD screening scores of placenta consumers and non-consumers in a community birth setting, using propensity score matching to address anticipated extensive confounding. METHODS: We used a medical records-based data set (n = 6038) containing pregnancy, birth, and postpartum information for US women who planned and completed community births. We first compared PPD screening scores as measured by the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS) of individuals who consumed their placenta to those who did not, with regard to demographics, pregnancy characteristics, and history of mental health challenges. Matching placentophagic (n = 1876) and non-placentophagic (n = 1876) groups were then created using propensity scores. The propensity score model included more than 90 variables describing medical and obstetric history, demographics, pregnancy characteristics, and intrapartum and postpartum complications, thus addressing confounding by all of these variables. We then used logistic regression to compare placentophagic to non-placentophagic groups based on commonly-cited EPDS cutoff values (≥ 11; ≥ 13) for likely PPD. RESULTS: In the unmatched and unadjusted analysis, placentophagy was associated with an increased risk of PPD. In the matched sample, 9.9% of women who ate their placentas reported EPDS ≥ 11, compared to 8.4% of women who did not (5.5% and 4.8%, respectively, EPDS ≥ 13 or greater). After controlling for over 90 variables (including prior mental health challenges) in the matched and adjusted analysis, placentophagy was associated with an increased risk of PPD between 15 and 20%, depending on the published EPDS cutoff point used. Numerous sensitivity analyses did not alter this general finding. CONCLUSIONS: Placentophagic individuals in our study scored higher on an EPDS screening than carefully matched non-placentophagic controls. Why placentophagic women score higher on the EPDS remains unclear, but we suspect reverse causality plays an important role. Future research could assess psychosocial factors that may motivate some individuals to engage in placentophagy, and that may also indicate greater risk of PPD. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-023-05852-7. BioMed Central 2023-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC10362633/ /pubmed/37481527 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05852-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Benyshek, Daniel C.
Bovbjerg, Marit L.
Cheyney, Melissa
Comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using EPDS in US community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis
title Comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using EPDS in US community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis
title_full Comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using EPDS in US community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using EPDS in US community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using EPDS in US community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis
title_short Comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using EPDS in US community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis
title_sort comparison of placenta consumers’ and non-consumers’ postpartum depression screening results using epds in us community birth settings (n=6038): a propensity score analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10362633/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37481527
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05852-7
work_keys_str_mv AT benyshekdanielc comparisonofplacentaconsumersandnonconsumerspostpartumdepressionscreeningresultsusingepdsinuscommunitybirthsettingsn6038apropensityscoreanalysis
AT bovbjergmaritl comparisonofplacentaconsumersandnonconsumerspostpartumdepressionscreeningresultsusingepdsinuscommunitybirthsettingsn6038apropensityscoreanalysis
AT cheyneymelissa comparisonofplacentaconsumersandnonconsumerspostpartumdepressionscreeningresultsusingepdsinuscommunitybirthsettingsn6038apropensityscoreanalysis