nach oben

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Erschienen in:

13.04.2022 | Review

Predictive validity of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale and other tools for screening depression in pregnant and postpartum women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

verfasst von: Seong-Hi Park, Jeung-Im Kim

Erschienen in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Ausgabe 5/2023

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the predictive validity of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and other tools for screening depression in pregnant and postpartum women through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycArticles databases was conducted using the following keywords: depression, perinatal-related terms, and EPDS. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 was used to assess the risk of bias in diagnostic studies.

Results

The search identified 823 articles, of which 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. In 1831 pregnant women from nine studies, pooled sensitivity and specificity of the EPDS were 0.81 and 0.87, respectively, with summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curve of 0.90. In 515 postpartum women from six studies, pooled sensitivity, specificity, and sROC were 0.79, 0.92, and 0.90, respectively. We then compared the EPDS with other tools using three or more studies. The sROC curve of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 was 0.74, which was lower than that (0.86) of the EPDS. The sROC curve of the Beck Depression Inventory and the ten-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale was 0.91, similar to that of the EPDS (0.90 and 0.87). However, in comparison with the Postpartum Depression Screening Scale (0.98), the sROC curve of the EPDS was 0.54.

Conclusion

As a tool specialized for screening depression in pregnant and postpartum women, the EPDS showed excellent performance. Thus, the EPDS can be used in preference to other tools to screen for depression in perinatal women at a primary care setting or a midwifery center.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Biaggi A, Conroy S, Pawlby S, Pariante CM (2016) Identifying the women at risk of antenatal anxiety and depression: a systematic review. J Affect Disord 191:62–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.11.014CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Hay DF, Pawlby S, Waters CS, Sharp D (2008) Antepartum and postpartum exposure to maternal depression: different effects on different adolescent outcomes. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 49:1079–1088. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01959.xCrossRefPubMed

Kingston D, Kehler H, Austin MP et al (2018) Trajectories of maternal depressive symptoms during pregnancy and the first 12 months postpartum and child externalizing and internalizing behavior at three years. PLoS One 13(4):e0195365. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195365CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Guintivano J, Manuck T, Meltzer-Brody S (2018) Predictors of postpartum depression: a comprehensive review of the last decade of evidence. Clin Obstet Gynecol 61(3):591–603. https://doi.org/10.1097/GRF.0000000000000368CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Leigh B, Milgrom J (2008) Risk factors for antenatal depression, postnatal depression and parenting stress. BMC Psychiatry 8(1):24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-8-24CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

ACOG committee on practice bulletins-obstetrics (2018) ACOG Practice Bulletin: Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists number 92, April 2008 (replaces practice bulletin number 87, November 2007) use of psychiatric medications during pregnancy and lactation. Obstet Gynecol 111:1001–1020. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816fd910 (Reaffirmed Obstet Gynecol 131:185. Reaffirmed 2020)CrossRef

Stewart DE (2011) Clinical practice depression during pregnancy. N Engl J Med 365(17):1605–1611. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1102730CrossRefPubMed

Fitelson E, Kim S, Baker AS, Leight K (2010) Treatment of postpartum depression: clinical, psychological and pharmacological options. Int J Womens Health 3:1–14. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S6938CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Horowitz JA, Goodman JH (2005) Identifying and treating postpartum depression. JOGNN 34(2):264–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0884217505274583CrossRefPubMed

10.

Szegedi A, Jansen WT, van Willigenburg AP, van der Meulen E, Stassen HH, Thase ME (2009) Early improvement in the first 2 weeks as a predictor of treatment outcome in patients with major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis including 6562 patients. J Clin Psychiatry 70(3):344–353. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.07m03780CrossRefPubMed

11.

Ren Y, Yang H, Browning C, Thomas S, Liu M (2015) Performance of screening tools in detecting major depressive disorder among patients with coronary heart disease: a systematic review. Med Sci Monit 21:646–653. https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.892537CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

12.

Buist A, Bilszta J, Barnett B et al (2005) Recognition and management of perinatal depression in general practice: a survey of GPs and postnatal women. Aust Fam Phys 34:787–790

13.

Callister LC, Beckstrand RL, Corbett C (2011) Postpartum depression and help-seeking behaviors in immigrant hispanic women. JOGNN 40(4):440–449CrossRefPubMed

14.

ACOG (2018) ACOG committee opinion no. 757 summary: screening for perinatal depression. Obstet Gynecol 132:1314–1316. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002928CrossRef

15.

Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R (1987) Detection of postnatal depression. development of the 10-item Edinburgh postnatal depression scale. Br J Psychiatry 150:782–786. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.150.6.782CrossRefPubMed

16.

Rachel E (2015) Perinatal mental health: the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale, Manual 2nd edn. In: Cox J, Holden JM, Henshaw CM (eds) RCPsych, vol 25. Primary Health Care, London, p 12

17.

Lyubenova A et al (2021) Depression prevalence based on the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale compared to structured clinical interview for DSM disorders classification: systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 30(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1860CrossRef

18.

Levis B, Yan XW, He C, Sun Y, Benedetti A, Thombs BD (2019) Comparison of depression prevalence estimates in meta-analyses based on screening tools and rating scales versus diagnostic interviews: a meta-research review. BMC Med 17(1):65–65. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1297-6CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

19.

Levis B, Negeri A, Sun Y et al (2020) Accuracy of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data. BMJ 371:m4022. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4022CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

20.

Thombs BD, Benedetti A, Kloda LA et al (2015) Diagnostic accuracy of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale (EPDS) for detecting major depression in pregnant and postnatal women: protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analyses. BMJ Open 5(10):e009742. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009742CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

21.

Bossuyt PM, Davenport C, Deeks JJ et al. (2013) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. The cochrane training. https://training.cochrane.org/resource/cochrane-handbook-systematic-reviews-diagnostic-test-accuracy. Accessed 15 May 2021

22.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

23.

Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME et al (2011) QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 155:529–536. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009CrossRefPubMed

24.

Negeri ZF, Shaikh M, Beyene J (2018) Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis models for diagnostic test accuracy studies using arcsine-based transformations. Biom J 60:827–844. https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.201700101CrossRefPubMed

25.

Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A et al (2006) Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 6(1):31–31. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-31CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

26.

Patel A, Cooper N, Freeman S et al (2021) Graphical enhancements to summary receiver operating characteristic plots to facilitate the analysis and reporting of meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy data. Res Synth Methods 12:34–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1439CrossRefPubMed

27.

Freeman SC, Kerby CR, Patel A et al (2019) Development of an interactive web-based tool to conduct and interrogate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: MetaDTA. BMC Med Res Methodol 19:81CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

28.

Greiner M, Pfeiffer D, Smith RD (2000) Principles and practical application of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for diagnostic tests. Prev Vet Med 45:23–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-5877(00)00115-XCrossRefPubMed

29.

Walter SD (2002) Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med 21:1237–1256CrossRefPubMed

30.

Matthey S, Souter K, Valenti B, Ross-Hamid C (2019) Validation of the MGMQ in screening for emotional difficulties in women during pregnancy. J Affect Disord 256:156–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.05.037CrossRefPubMed

31.

Naja S, Al Kubaisi N, Chehab M, Al Dahshan A, Abuhashem N, Bougmiza I (2019) Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of EPDS and BDI-II as a screening tool for antenatal depression: evidence from Qatar. BMJ Open 9(9):e030365. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030365CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

32.

Sasaki Y, Baba T, Oyama R, Fukumoto K, Haba G, Sasaki M (2019) Re-evaluation of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale as screening for post-partum depression in Iwate prefecture, Japan. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 45(9):1876–1883. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.14042CrossRefPubMed

33.

Chorwe-Sungani G, Chipps J (2018) Validity and utility of instruments for screening of depression in women attending antenatal clinics in Blantyre district in Malawi. S Afr Fam Pract 60:114–120. https://doi.org/10.4102/safp.v60i4.4888CrossRef

34.

Green EP, Tuli H, Kwobah E, Menya D, Chesire I, Schmidt C (2018) Developing and validating a perinatal depression screening tool in Kenya blending Western criteria with local idioms: a mixed methods study. J Affect Disord 228:49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.11.027CrossRefPubMed

35.

van Heyningen T, Honikman S, Tomlinson M, Field S, Myer L (2018) Comparison of mental health screening tools for detecting antenatal depression and anxiety disorders in South African women. PLoS One [Electronic Res] 13(4):e0193697. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193697CrossRefPubMed

36.

Castro CT, Martins Brancaglion MY, Nogueira CM, Bergo PA, Duarte GF, Nicolato R, Lopes PAR, Vitor LH, Correa H (2015) What is the best tool for screening antenatal depression? J Affect Disord 178:12–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.02.003CrossRef

37.

Gawlik S, Waldeier L, Muller M, Szabo A, Sohn C, Reck C (2013) Subclinical depressive symptoms during pregnancy and birth outcome–a pilot study in a healthy German sample. Arch Womens Ment Health 16(2):93–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-012-0320-0CrossRefPubMed

38.

Tandon SD, Cluxton-Keller F, Leis J, Le HN, Perry DFA (2012) Comparison of three screening tools to identify perinatal depression among low-income African American women. J Affect Disord 136(1–2):155–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.07.014CrossRefPubMed

39.

Fernandes MC, Srinivasan K, Stein AL, Menezes G, Sumithra R, Ramchandani PG (2011) Assessing prenatal depression in the rural developing world: a comparison of two screening measures. Arch Womens Ment Health 14(3):209–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-010-0190-2CrossRefPubMed

40.

Flynn HA, Sexton M, Ratliff S, Porter K, Zivin K (2011) Comparative performance of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale and the patient health questionnaire-9 in pregnant and postpartum women seeking psychiatric services. Psychiatry Res 187(1–2):130–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.10.022CrossRefPubMed

41.

Tran TD, Tran T, La B, Lee D, Rosenthal D, Fisher J (2011) Screening for perinatal common mental disorders in women in the North of Vietnam: a comparison of three psychometric instruments. J Affect Disord 133(1–2):281–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.03.038CrossRefPubMed

42.

Tesfaye M, Hanlon C, Wondimagegn D, Alem A (2010) Detecting postnatal common mental disorders in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: validation of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale and kessler scales. J Affect Disord 122(1–2):102–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2009.06.020CrossRefPubMed

43.

Hanusa BH, Scholle SH, Haskett RF, Spadaro K, Wisner KL (2008) Screening for depression in the postpartum period: a comparison of three instruments. J Womens Health 17(4):585–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmwh.2008.07.005CrossRef

44.

White G. (2008) A comparison of the postpartum depression screening scale (PDSS) with the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale (EPDS). New Zealand college of midwives journal 10(39):28–32. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A206107529/HRCA?u=anon~2d3f0f29&sid=googleScholar&xid=3b00c4bb. Accessed 7 Aug 2021

45.

Su KP, Chiu TH, Huang CL, Ho M, Lee CC, Wu PL, Lin CY, Liau CH, Liao CC, Chiu WC, Pariante CM (2007) Different cutoff points for different trimesters? the use of Edinburgh postnatal depression scale and beck depression inventory to screen for depression in pregnant Taiwanese women. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 29(5):436–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2007.05.005CrossRefPubMed

46.

Beck CT, Gable RK (2001) Comparative analysis of the performance of the postpartum depression screening scale with two other depression instruments. Nurs Res 50(4):242–250. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-200107000-00008CrossRefPubMed

47.

Payne JL (2016) Recent advances and controversies in peripartum depression. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep 5(3):250–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-016-0167-xCrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

48.

O’Connor E, Rossom RC, Henninger M et al. (2016) Screening for depression in adults: an updated systematic evidence review for the US preventive services task force. evidence synthesis No. 128. AHRQ publication No. 14-05208-EF-1. Rockville, MD: Agency for healthcare research and quality. http://lps3.www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.libproxy.snu.ac.kr/books/NBK349027/?report=reader. Accessed 13 Nov 2021

49.

Nelson HD, Cantor A, Pappas M, Weeks C (2020) Screening for anxiety in adolescent and adult women: a systematic review for the women’s preventive services initiative. Ann Intern Med 173(1):29–41. https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-0579CrossRefPubMed

50.

Reuland D, Cherrington A, Watkins GS, Bradford DW, Blanco RA, Gaynes BN (2009) Diagnostic accuracy of Spanish language depression-screening instruments. Ann Fam Med 7(5):455–462. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.981CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

51.

Wang L, Kroenke K, Stump TM, Monahan PO (2021) Screening for perinatal depression with the patient health questionnaire depression scale (PHQ-9): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 68:74–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2020.12.007CrossRefPubMed

52.

Beck CT, Gable RK (2000) Postpartum depression screening scale: development and psychometric testing. Nurs Res 49(5):272–282. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-200009000-00006CrossRefPubMed

53.

Fellmeth G, Harrison S, Opondo C, Nair M, Kurinczuk JJ, Alderdice F (2021) Validated screening tools to identify common mental disorders in perinatal and postpartum women in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Psychiatry 21(1):200–209. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-021-03190-6CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Titel: Predictive validity of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale and other tools for screening depression in pregnant and postpartum women: a systematic review and meta-analysis
verfasst von: Seong-Hi Park
Jeung-Im Kim
Publikationsdatum: 13.04.2022
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Ausgabe 5/2023
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06525-0

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Alter der Mutter beeinflusst Risiko für kongenitale Anomalie

28.05.2024 Kinder- und Jugendgynäkologie Nachrichten

Welchen Einfluss das Alter ihrer Mutter auf das Risiko hat, dass Kinder mit nicht chromosomal bedingter Malformation zur Welt kommen, hat eine ungarische Studie untersucht. Sie zeigt: Nicht nur fortgeschrittenes Alter ist riskant.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Fehlerkultur Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Mammakarzinom: Brustdichte beeinflusst rezidivfreies Überleben

26.05.2024 Mammakarzinom Nachrichten

Frauen, die zum Zeitpunkt der Brustkrebsdiagnose eine hohe mammografische Brustdichte aufweisen, haben ein erhöhtes Risiko für ein baldiges Rezidiv, legen neue Daten nahe.

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

24.05.2024 Mammakarzinom Nachrichten

In der MONARCHE-3-Studie lebten Frauen mit fortgeschrittenem Hormonrezeptor-positivem, HER2-negativem Brustkrebs länger, wenn sie zusätzlich zu einem nicht steroidalen Aromatasehemmer mit Abemaciclib behandelt wurden; allerdings verfehlte der numerische Zugewinn die statistische Signifikanz.

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Predictive validity of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale and other tools for screening depression in pregnant and postpartum women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Alter der Mutter beeinflusst Risiko für kongenitale Anomalie

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

Mammakarzinom: Brustdichte beeinflusst rezidivfreies Überleben

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

Update Gynäkologie

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2023

Effect of anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair by modified transvaginal mesh surgery: a retrospective cohort study

Retraction Note: Does laparoscopic ovarian diathermy change clomiphene-resistant PCOS into clomiphene-sensitive?

The cumulative incidence of neonatal metabolic acidemia after terminal bradycardia in the 2nd stage of labor: a survival-based model

Response to Letter to Reply to the authors’ response to the letter to the editor concerning the article “Randomized control trial on the effectiveness and safety of direct trocar versus Veress needle entry techniques in obese women during diagnostic laparoscopy”

Current trends in diagnostic and therapeutic management of the axilla in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy: results of the German-wide NOGGO MONITOR 24 survey

Study of postoperative complications after the implementation of a multidisciplinary care pathway for patients with digestive endometriosis

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Alter der Mutter beeinflusst Risiko für kongenitale Anomalie

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

Mammakarzinom: Brustdichte beeinflusst rezidivfreies Überleben

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

Update Gynäkologie