| Literature DB >> 35742022 |
Klavdija Čuček Trifkovič1, Dušanka Mičetić-Turk2, Sergej Kmetec1, Maja Strauss1, Hannah G Dahlen3, Jann P Foster3,4,5, Sabina Fijan1.
Abstract
The mother and infant form a unique bond, with maternal mental health affecting the interactions with the infant and infant behaviours impacting maternal mental health. One of the possible mechanisms influencing maternal mental health is the manipulation of the gut-brain axis by consuming probiotic supplements. Probiotics can also have an indirect influence on maternal mental health via the modulation of the infant microbiome and consequently improving the infant's health and thus, indirectly leading to an improvement in maternal mood. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy of probiotics on maternal mental health by searching for randomised controlled trials via international databases: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science until January 2022. A meta-analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration methodology where possible. We found seven clinical trials that included the word probiotics and addressed maternal depression and/or anxiety. Of these, five trials investigated the influence of maternal probiotic supplementation on the gut-brain axis. Two trials investigated the indirect influence of probiotics on maternal depression via supplementation of probiotics by infants and subsequent influence on the crying of colicky infants. Meta-analysis of two studies of pregnant and postnatal women and two studies of infants consuming probiotics on the outcome of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale for mothers showed no statistical difference. The findings indicate that maternal depression is very complex and is influenced by various bidirectional factors. One of the factors that can improve maternal mental health is probiotics, however, careful consideration must be given to correct strain selection as strain-specific effectiveness was observed. Further well-designed, robust clinical studies are warranted.Entities:
Keywords: depression; postpartum; pregnancy; prevention; probiotics; psychobiotics
Year: 2022 PMID: 35742022 PMCID: PMC9223194 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10060970
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Healthcare (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9032
Research strategy containing inclusion criteria, exclusion criteria and search limits.
| Database: | PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, Scopus in Web of Science | |
|---|---|---|
| Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria | |
| Participants: | Pregnant women or postpartum women over 18 years of age (or infants if they indirectly affected maternal mental health). | Pregnant women under 18 years of age. Infants, if maternal mental health was not assessed. |
| Intervention | Effect of probiotics (or psychobiotics) on the occurrence of depression in women during pregnancy and in the postnatal period. | The effect of probiotics (or psychobiotics) on depression during the woman’s pregnancy and in the postnatal period is not included. |
| Comparison | Studies included a comparator or control group. | Studies without a control group. |
| Outcome: | The article displays the direct or indirect effect of probiotics (or psychobiotics) on the occurrence of depression during pregnancy or in the postnatal period. | The article does not display the direct or indirect effect of probiotics (or psychobiotics) on the occurrence of depression during pregnancy or in the postnatal period. |
| Types of | Randomised controlled trials. | Research articles (quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research). Systematic review articles or other types of reviews. Duplicates, commentaries, editorials, conferences, and research protocols. |
|
| ||
| Timeframe: | Searches were performed from inception to January 2022. | |
| Language: | English, German, Slovenian. | |
Figure 1PRISMA flow diagram of study selection.
Quality assessment checklist of included clinical trials using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for randomised controlled trials.
| First Author, Year (In Alphabetical Order) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Browne, 2021 [ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | superior |
| Dawe, 2020 [ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ◯ | ✓ | ✓ | superior |
| Mirghafourvand, 2016 [ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | superior |
| Mi, 2015 [ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ◯ | ◯ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ◯ | ✓ | ✓ | medium high |
| Hulkkonen, 2021 [ | ✓ | ✓ | ◯ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | superior |
| Slykerman, 2017 [ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ◯ | ✓ | ✓ | superior |
| Sung, 2014 [ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ◯ | ✓ | ✓ | superior |
Note possible answers: ✓—YES, ✕—NO, ◯—Unclear, not applicable (NA); 1. Was true randomisation used for assignment of participants to treatment groups? 2. Was allocation to treatment groups concealed? 3. Were treatment groups similar at the baseline? 4. Were participants blind to treatment assignment? 5. Were those delivering treatment blind to treatment assignment? 6. Were outcomes assessors blind to treatment assignment? 7. Were treatment groups treated identically other than the intervention of interest? 8. Was follow up complete and if not, were differences between groups in terms of their follow up adequately described and analysed? 9. Were participants analysed in the groups to which they were randomised? 10. Were outcomes measured in the same way for treatment groups? 11. Were outcomes measured in a reliable way? 12. Was appropriate statistical analysis used? 13. Was the trial design appropriate, and were any deviations from the standard RCT design (individual randomisation, parallel groups) accounted for in the conduct and analysis of the trial? Study quality rated according to the Camp and Legge’s recommendation [58].
Characteristics and description of the seven clinical studies on the influence of probiotics on maternal depression and/or anxiety.
| Reference (First | Study Design | Population that | Intervention | Related to Depression/Anxiety | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Active | Control | Duration | Validated Questionnaires | Main Findings | |||
|
| |||||||
| Hulkkonen, 2021 [ | Randomised, | 438 pregnant | One capsule per day | Microcrystalline cellulose | From the first study visit up to 6 months | EPDS, DEP, ANH, ANX, SCL-90. | The intervention modestly |
| Slykerman, 2017 [ | Randomised, double-blind, | 380 pregnant women were recruited | One capsule per day | Corn-derived maltodextrin | From 14–16 weeks | EPDS, STAI-6 | Women in the intervention group (HN001) had significantly lower depression ( |
|
| |||||||
| Browne, 2021 [ | A double-blind, | 40 healthy pregnant women (≥18 years) (≥26 and ≤30 weeks gestation) with | One powder sachet per day containing | Indistinguishable regarding colour, taste, and smell from | Taken for up to 8 weeks | EPDS, LEIDS-R, PRAQ-R, STAI-S, PES, | There were no differences between the groups for improving maternal mood during gestation ( |
| Dawe, 2020 [ | A randomised | 164 pregnant women with obesity; forming analytic sample | One capsule per day | Microcrystalline cellulose and | From | EPDS, STAI-6, SF-12-v2 | Anxiety and physical well-being scores worsened over time |
| Mirghafourvand, 2016 [ | Triple-blind placebo | 60 pregnant | 300 g of yoghurt three times a day containing 4.8 × 1010 cfu of | Conventional | Four weeks after | SF-36 | There was no statistically |
|
| |||||||
| Mi, 2015 [ | Randomised single blind placebo-controlled study | 42 infants less than four months of age, weighing between 2.5 kg and 4.00 kg and exclusively or | An oil-based suspension containing | Identical formulation | 28 days | EPDS | Improvement in maternal |
| Sung, 2014 [ | Double-blind, | 132 healthy breastfed or formula-fed | Five drops of oil-based | Maltodextrin in oil suspension | One month | EPDS, | No improvements in maternal mental health were observed ( |
BMI: body mass index. EPDS: Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale for assessment of maternal postnatal mood. DEP: EPDS-subscale to describe non-specific depressive symptoms. ANH: EPDS-subscale to describe anhedonia; ANX: EPDS-subscale to describe anxiety symptoms. SCL-90/anxiety subscale questionnaire for assessing anxiety and other psychiatric symptoms. STAI-6: a shortened version of the original Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for assessment of state anxiety. LEIDS-R: Leiden Index of Depression Sensitivity-Revised. PRAQ-R: Pregnancy-specific Related Anxiety Questionnaire-Revised. STAI-S: State-trait Anxiety Inventory self-report questionnaire for the assessment of general anxiety. PES: Pregnancy Experience Scale for assessing maternal appraisal of daily, pregnancy-specific hassles and uplifts. APL: Dutch Everyday Problem List. MAAS: Maternal antenatal Attachment Scale. MPAS: Maternal Postnatal Attachment Scale. PSQI: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. SF-12-V2: a short form of Health survey SF-36 to assess physical and mental aspects of functional health and well-being. SF-36: quality of life (QoL) short-form health survey. AQol-4R: Assessment of quality of life. PedsQL: paediatric quality of life inventory family impact subscale to assess family functioning.
Figure 2Meta-analysis of the effect of probiotic supplementation for pregnant women and postnatal women on EPDS depression score.
Figure 3Meta-analysis of the effect of probiotic supplementation of colicky infants on the EPDS depression score of mothers.