Coping During Pregnancy Following Exposure to a Natural Disaster: The QF2011 Queensland Flood Study

Abstract

IntroductionThis study investigated how coping strategies moderated the impact of disaster-related objective hardship on subjective distress in pregnant women. MethodsThe objective hardship (exposure severity), subjective distress (Peritraumatic Distress Inventory, Peritraumatic Dissociative Experiences Questionnaire and Impact of Event Scale-Revised) and coping styles (Brief COPE) of pregnant women (N = 226) exposed to the 2011 Queensland, Australia flood were assessed. Moderation analyses were used to assess how coping strategies moderated the relationship between objective hardship and subjective distress levels. ResultsWe found that the more severe the objective flood exposure, the greater the women's subjective distress. The moderation analyses were significant for the Brief COPE's three coping styles (i.e., problem-focused coping, emotion-focused coping, and dysfunctional coping). For women experiencing high levels of objective hardship, problem-focused (∆R2 = 1.7%) and dysfunctional coping (∆R2 = 1.5%) elevated subjective distress levels. For women experiencing low or moderate levels of objective hardship, emotion-focused coping reduced levels of subjective distress (∆R2 = 1.3%). A three-way interaction between objective hardship, emotion-focused coping, and dysfunctional coping approached significance (∆R2 = 1.0%), indicating a protective role of emotion-focused coping under high levels of objective hardship, for women who frequently use maladaptive coping strategies. LimitationsSample was generally high SES and no measure of social support was available. ConclusionResults suggest that both problem-focused and dysfunctional coping strategies were maladaptive for women with relatively high exposure levels. Overall, emotion-focused coping strategies were more likely than problem-focused or dysfunctional strategies to reduce pregnant women's subjective distress following the flood.