Dataset Information

Perceived vulnerability to immigration policies among postpartum Hispanic/Latina women in the MADRES pregnancy cohort before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction and objectives

Research suggests that perceived immigration policy vulnerability has important health implications. Coupled with the mental and physical stressors accompanying the postpartum period and a growing awareness of the discrimination and structural racism experienced by marginalized communities globally, the coronavirus disease 2019 period may have exacerbated stress among vulnerable populations, specifically postpartum Hispanic/Latina women. This study evaluated perceived immigration policy vulnerability (i.e. discrimination, social isolation, and family threats) in early postpartum Hispanic/Latina women in Los Angeles before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Methods

The Perceived Immigration Policy Effects Scale (PIPES) was administered cross-sectionally at 1 month postpartum to 187 Hispanic/Latina women in the MADRES cohort. Respondents between September 2018 and March 2020 were classified as "pre-pandemic" (N = 128), between March 2020 and July 2020 as "early pandemic" (N = 38), and between August 2020 and November 2021 as "later pandemic" (N = 21). Average PIPES subscale scores were dichotomized into "higher" and "lower" groups (⩽median, >median) and logistic regression models were performed.

Results

Approximately half of participants had incomes of <$50,000 (50.3%) and were Latin American born (54.6%). After adjusting for age, nativity, education, income, postpartum distress, and employment status, early pandemic respondents had 5.05 times the odds of a higher score on the perceived discrimination subscale (95% CI: 1.81, 14.11), 6.47 times the odds of a higher score on the social isolation subscale (95% CI: 2.23, 18.74), 2.66 times the odds of a higher score on the family threats subscale (95% CI: 0.97, 7.32), and 3.36 times the odds of a higher total score (95% CI: 1.19, 9.51) when compared to pre-pandemic respondents. There were no significant subscale score differences between later pandemic and pre-pandemic periods.

Conclusion

Higher perceived immigration policy vulnerability was reported among postpartum women during the early coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic versus pre-pandemic periods. This suggests greater social inequities during the early pandemic period.

SUBMITTER: Hernandez-Castro I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9511002 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Perceived vulnerability to immigration policies among postpartum Hispanic/Latina women in the MADRES pregnancy cohort before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hernandez-Castro Ixel I Toledo-Corral Claudia M CM Chavez Thomas T Habre Rima R Grubbs Brendan B Al-Marayati Laila L Lerner Deborah D Lurvey Nathana N Lagomasino Isabel I Eckel Sandrah P SP Dunton Genevieve F GF Farzan Shohreh F SF Breton Carrie V CV Bastain Theresa M TM

Women's health (London, England) 20220101

<h4>Introduction and objectives</h4>Research suggests that perceived immigration policy vulnerability has important health implications. Coupled with the mental and physical stressors accompanying the postpartum period and a growing awareness of the discrimination and structural racism experienced by marginalized communities globally, the coronavirus disease 2019 period may have exacerbated stress among vulnerable populations, specifically postpartum Hispanic/Latina women. This study evaluated p ...[more]

PMID: 36148937

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDepression is the leading cause of mental health-related morbidity and affects twice as many women as men. Hispanic/Latina women in the US have unique risk factors for depression and they have lower utilization of mental health care services. Identifying modifiable risk factors for maternal depression, such as ambient air pollution, is an urgent public health priority. We aimed to determine whether prenatal exposure to ambient air pollutants was associated with maternal depression at 12 months after childbirth.MethodsOne hundred eighty predominantly low-income Hispanic/Latina women participating in the ongoing MADRES cohort study in Los Angeles, CA were followed from early pregnancy through 12 months postpartum through a series of phone questionnaires and in-person study visits. Daily prenatal ambient pollutant estimates of nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) were assigned to participant residences using inverse-distance squared spatial interpolation from ambient monitoring data. Exposures were averaged for each trimester and across pregnancy. The primary outcome measure was maternal depression at 12 months postpartum, as reported on the 20-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale. We classified each participant as depressed (n = 29) or not depressed (n = 151) based on the suggested cutoff of 16 or above (possible scores range from 0 to 60) and fitted logistic regression models, adjusting for potential confounders.ResultsWe found over a two-fold increased odds of depression at 12 months postpartum associated with second trimester NO2 exposure (OR = 2.63, 95% CI: 1.41-4.89) and pregnancy average NO2 (OR = 2.04, 95% CI: 1.13-3.69). Higher second trimester PM2.5 exposure also was associated with increased depression at 12 months postpartum (OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.01-2.42). The effect for second trimester PM10 was similar and was borderline significant (OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 0.97-2.56).ConclusionsIn a low-income cohort consisting of primarily Hispanic/Latina women in urban Los Angeles, we found that prenatal ambient air pollution, especially mid-pregnancy NO2 and PM2.5, increased the risk of depression at 12 months after childbirth. These results underscore the need to better understand the contribution of modifiable environmental risk factors during potentially critical exposure periods.

Project description:BackgroundDiet during pregnancy may be a potential intervention for preventing hypertensive disorders of pregnancy that disproportionally burdens Hispanic/Latina women.Methods and resultsThe MADRES (Maternal And Developmental Risks from Environmental and Social stressors) study (n=451) is a prospective pregnancy cohort of predominantly low-income Hispanic/Latina women in Los Angeles, California, who completed up to 2 staff-administered 24-hour dietary recalls in the third trimester of pregnancy. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy were abstracted from medical records and based on a physician's diagnosis or systolic or diastolic blood pressure (≥140 or ≥90 mm Hg, respectively) at ≥2 consecutive prenatal visits. Using multivariable logistic regression, we evaluated associations of 2 previously derived dietary patterns in this population (solid fats, refined grains, and cheese and vegetables, oils, and fruit) and the Healthy Eating Index 2015 with (1) gestational hypertension, (2) preeclampsia, and (3) any hypertensive disorder of pregnancy (either gestational hypertension or preeclampsia). In separate models, we additionally tested interactions with prepregnancy body mass index. Comparing highest-to-lowest quartiles, the solid fats, refined grains, and cheese dietary pattern was associated with an increased odds of any hypertensive disorder of pregnancy (odds ratio [OR], 3.99 [95% CI, 1.44-11.0]; Ptrend=0.014) and preeclampsia (OR, 4.10 [95% CI, 1.25-13.5]; Ptrend=0.036), whereas the vegetables, oils, and fruit pattern was associated with reduced odds of preeclampsia (OR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.10-0.99]; Ptrend=0.041). Among the overweight prepregnancy body mass index category, inverse associations of vegetables, oils, and fruit and Healthy Eating Index 2015 with preeclampsia were more pronounced (both Pinteractions=0.017). Healthy Eating Index 2015 findings were generally nonsignificant.ConclusionsWhile the solid fats, refined grains, and cheese diet was strongly associated with preeclampsia during pregnancy, findings suggest the vegetables, oils, and fruit diet may be more relevant than Healthy Eating Index 2015 for preventing preeclampsia among low-income Hispanic/Latina women.

Project description:ImportanceCurrent US immigration policy targets immigrants from Mexico and other Latin American countries; anti-immigration rhetoric has possible implications for the US-born children of immigrant parents.ObjectiveTo assess whether concerns about immigration policy are associated with worse mental and physical health among US citizen children of Latino immigrants.Design, setting, and participantsThis study of cohort data from the Center for the Health Assessment of Mothers and Children of Salinas (CHAMACOS), a long-term study of Mexican farmworker families in the Salinas Valley region of California, included a sample of US-born adolescents (n = 397) with at least 1 immigrant parent. These adolescents underwent a health assessment before the 2016 presidential election (at age 14 years) and in the first year after the election (at age 16 years). Data were analyzed from March 23, 2018, to February 14, 2019.ExposuresAdolescents aged 16 years self-reported their concern about immigration policy using 2 subscales (Threat to Family and Children's Vulnerability) of the Perceived Immigration Policy Effects Scale (PIPES) instrument.Main outcomes and measuresResting systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure; body mass index; maternal- and self-reported depression and anxiety problems (using Behavioral Assessment System for Children, 2nd edition); self-reported sleep quality (using Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index [PSQI]); and maternal rating of child's overall health. All measures except sleep quality were assessed at both the aged-14-years and aged-16-years visits. Health outcomes at age 16 years and the change in outcomes between ages 14 and 16 years were examined among youth participants who reported low or moderate PIPES scores vs high PIPES scores.ResultsIn the sample of 397 US-born Latino adolescents (207 [52.1%] female) and primarily Mexican American individuals, nearly half of the youth participants worried at least sometimes about the personal consequences of the US immigration policy (n = 178 [44.8%]), family separation because of deportation (177 [44.6%]), and being reported to the immigration office (164 [41.3%]). Those with high compared with low or moderate PIPES scores had higher self-reported mean anxiety T scores (5.43; 95% CI, 2.64-8.23), higher maternally reported anxiety T scores (2.98; 95% CI, 0.53-5.44), and worse PSQI scores (0.98; 95% CI, 0.36-1.59). Youth participants with high PIPES scores reported statistically significantly increased levels of anxiety over the 2 visits (adjusted mean difference-in-differences, 2.91; 95% CI, 0.20-5.61) and not significantly increased levels of depression (adjusted mean difference-in-differences, 2.63; 95% CI, -0.28 to 5.54).Conclusions and relevanceFear and worry about the personal consequences of current US immigration policy and rhetoric appear to be associated with higher anxiety levels, sleep problems, and blood pressure changes among US-born Latino adolescents; anxiety significantly increased after the 2016 presidential election.

Dataset Information

Perceived vulnerability to immigration policies among postpartum Hispanic/Latina women in the MADRES pregnancy cohort before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction and objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Perceived vulnerability to immigration policies among postpartum Hispanic/Latina women in the MADRES pregnancy cohort before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets