Back

Virtually Delivered Psychosocial Intervention for Mothers Expecting a Baby with Congenital Heart Disease: A Proof-of-Concept Study of HEARTPrep

Sood, E.; Canter, K.; Arasteh, K.; Kazak, A. E.

2026-06-05 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.06.03.26354861 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Maternal mental health problems are common after prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart disease (CHD), with long-term implications for child and family wellbeing. HEARTPrep is a prenatal psychosocial intervention with three self-paced modules and corresponding telehealth sessions, delivered during pregnancy via mobile app to improve mental health and wellbeing for mothers expecting a baby with CHD. This proof-of-concept study evaluated the feasibility of HEARTPrep and examined maternal mental health and psychosocial functioning throughout participation. Methods: Participants were mothers receiving care for a fetal CHD diagnosis within one health system. Feasibility was assessed via rates of enrollment and completion. Mothers completed 4-item PROMIS questionnaires assessing anxiety, depression, and social isolation and reported self-efficacy and hope on a weekly basis throughout HEARTPrep. Results: Of 34 recruited mothers, 29 (85%) enrolled and two were subsequently not eligible (delivery prior to participation, change in fetal diagnosis), resulting in a final sample of 27 mothers. The majority (n = 22, 81%) completed all three telehealth sessions and Modules 1 (n = 22, 81%) and 2 (n = 19, 70%), with just over half (n = 14, 52%) completing Module 3 prior to delivery. Mean PROMIS depression T-scores decreased from 57.5 to 52.9, and 48% of mothers had a decrease in depression scores exceeding the meaningful change threshold (half standard deviation). The percentage of mothers reporting high self-efficacy increased from 19% to 48%. Conclusions: HEARTPrep is feasible and corresponds with reduced maternal depression and increased self-efficacy, supporting proof-of-concept. A randomized controlled trial is needed to determine whether HEARTPrep improves outcomes compared to a control group.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.3%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 19%
10.0%
3
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
8.1%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.7%
5
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.8%
6
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
7
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.9%
8
Open Heart
19 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.5%
9
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
10
Heart
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.0%
11
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
12
Vaccine
189 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
13
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
14
The American Journal of Cardiology
15 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.6%
15
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
16
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
17
Nutrients
64 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
18
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
19
Frontiers in Pediatrics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
20
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
21
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
22
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 68%
1.1%
23
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
24
The Journal of Pediatrics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
25
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
26
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
27
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
28
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%