Coping strategies following the diagnosis of a fetal anomaly: A scoping review

Abstract

Introduction: Many women experience severe emotional distress (such as grief, depression, and anxiety) following a diagnosis of fetal anomaly. The ability to cope with stressful events and regulate emotions across diverse situations may play a primary role in psychological wellbeing. This study aims to present coping strategies after disclosing a fetal anomaly to pregnant women.

Methods: This is a scoping review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Electronic databases, including Web of Science (WOS, BCI, KJD, MEDLINE, RSCI, SCIELO), CINAHL, and EBSCO PsycARTICLES, were used to search for primary studies from the inception of each database to 2021. The keywords were determined by existing literature and included: "fetal anomaly," "fetal abnormality," "fetal anomaly," "fetal abnormality" AND "cope," "coping," "deal," "manage," "adapt^*," "emotion^* regulate^*," with the use of Boolean operators AND/OR. A total of 16 articles were reviewed, followed by advancing scoping review methodology of Arksey and O'Malley's framework.

Results: In this review, we identified 52 coping strategies using five questionnaires in seven quantitative studies and one mixed-method study. The relationship between coping strategies and mental distress was explored. However, the results were inconsistent and incomparable. We synthesized four coping categories from qualitative studies and presented them in an intersection.

Conclusion: This scoping review identified the coping strategies of women with a diagnosis of a fetal anomaly during pregnancy. The relationship between coping strategies and mental distress was uncertain and needs more exploration. We considered an appropriate measurement should be necessary for the research of coping in women diagnosed with fetal anomaly pregnancy.

Keywords: coping strategies; fetal anomaly; mental distress; scoping review; women's health.

Figure 1

Flow diagram of the article.

Figure 2

Methodological quality of quantitative studies. Q1: Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined? Q2: Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail? Q3: Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way? Q4: Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement of the condition? Q5: Were confounding factors identified? Q6: Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated? Q7: Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way? Q8: Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

Figure 3

Methodological quality of qualitative studies. Q1: Was there congruity between the stated philosophical perspective and the research methodology? Q2: Was there congruity between the research methodology and the research question or objectives? Q3: Was there congruity between the research methodology and the methods used to collect data? Q4: Was there congruity between the research methodology and the representation and analysis of data? Q5: Was there congruity between the research methodology and the interpretation of results? Q6: Was there a statement locating the researcher culturally or theoretically? Q7: Was the influence of the researcher on the research, and vice-versa, addressed? Q8: Were participants, and their voices, adequately represented? Q9: Was the research ethical according to current criteria or, for recent studies, and is there evidence of ethical approval by an appropriate body? Q10: Did the conclusions drawn in the research report flow from the analysis, or interpretation, of the data?

Figure 4

Categories of coping strategies for women with a fetal anomaly.